User talk:AzerbaijaniQizilbash

March 2024

Hello, I'm Geardona. I noticed that you recently removed content from Aq Qoyunlu without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Geardona (talk to me?) 12:56, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I did not delete the content in Akkoyunlu. I just edited it. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 15:25, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at History of Iran. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Remsense诉 15:13, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

My edits are not offensive. Wikipedia misinforms people by calling the Safavid and Afsharid empires Persian. I wanted to correct this misinformation with the edits I made. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 15:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I did not delete the content in Akkoyunlu. I just edited it. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 15:22, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Battle of Karnal. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. "Iranian/Persian" obviously does not refer to ethnicity here, which is irrelevant. Moreover, WP:RS routinely use those words [1] HistoryofIran (talk) 15:49, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

It may not be referring to ethnicity, but this is misunderstood by people. I want to change it so that people can understand it better. Moreover, this is not my point of view. It is a fact that Afsharids are of Turkic origin. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 16:18, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Battle of Karnal, you may be blocked from editing. Geardona (talk to me?) 16:15, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

The terms "Persian" and "Iranian" are frequently used on the Karnal war page. This is not true.

Afshar (Azerbaijani: Əfşar افشار; Turkish: Avşar, Afşar; Turkmen: Owşar اوْوشار; Persian: افشار, romanized: Afshār) is a tribe of Oghuz Turkic origin, that split into several groups in Iran, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Turkey and Afghanistan.

During the Seljuk conquests of the 11th century, they moved from Central Asia into the Middle East. They are noted in history for being one of the Qizilbash tribes that helped establish the Safavid dynasty of Iran, and for being the source of descent of Iran's Afsharid dynasty. Nader Shah, who became the monarch of Iran in 1736, was from the Qereklu clan (Persian: قرخلو) of Afshars. Afshars mainly inhabit Iran, where they remain a largely nomadic group. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 16:24, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

i have sources. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 16:24, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

No one is disputing that they're of Turkic descent... however it's irrelevant in this context. Please click the link up above, it clearly demonstrates that WP:RS frequently uses this term. Moreover, you tried to replace "Iran" with "Azerbaijan", the latter which was not a country back then [2] [3] [4] HistoryofIran (talk) 16:46, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

This debate is about whether Afsharids are Persians or Turks.

On the Battle of Karnal page, there are phrases such as "Decisive Persian Victory", "Afsharid dynasty of Iran", "Persian Officers". This bothers me greatly. Everyone knows that Afsharids are not Persians. This is a big mistake. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 18:04, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

We would prefer not to take yours or any other editor's word for it. WP:Reliable sources, please. Remsense诉 18:05, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

The Afsharid Empire was actually founded by Nader Shah, who was of Turkic origin. Nader Shah was born into a Turkic tribe called the Afshar tribe in northeastern Iran. He rose to power in the early 18th century and established the Afsharid dynasty after overthrowing the declining Safavid dynasty. The Afsharid Empire lasted from 1736 to 1796 and was a significant Persianate state in Iran's history, but its founder, Nader Shah, hailed from a Turkic background. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 18:10, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Again, we would prefer not to take yours or any other editor's word for it. Please consult the policy pages we've been linking you. Remsense诉 18:11, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Do you want me to give you safe resources? AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 18:18, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I would like reliable sources. Some are also already cited in the articles, and you've been removing them carelessly. That doesn't mean reliable sources can't disagree, but you have to have a good reason for removing sourced content on big issues such as this. When people say "common sense", all I hear is "original research". Remsense诉 18:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

There is some evidence that the Afshars are of Turkish origin. The Ottoman document titled "Revan Livâsı Mufassal Tahrir Defteri", dated 1728, contains important information on this subject. This document records the historical ethnonyms of the Turkish ethnic groups of the region also known as the Revan Province. These ethnic groups have lived in this region since ancient times and contributed to the ethnogenesis of the Azerbaijani Turks. At the same time, this document dates back to the 18th century. It provides a database to examine the settlement areas and migration movements of these tribes during the period when the Tahrir Defteri was compiled in the first quarter of the century. In addition, Tahrir Defteri records shed light on the situation of the region that today constitutes the Republic of Armenia at that time. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 18:33, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

That is a primary source, and encyclopedias like Wikipedia usually require primary sources, which include most historical documents, to be analyzed by secondary sources. I wouldn't want to cite Magna Carta directly trying to make a claim about something that happened during the Hundred Years' War, a secondary source needs to make that claim first.

Moreover, you are still doing original research based on your own synthesis of different sources. When you want to argue something like The Afsharid empire is X; therefore, it is not Y, that requires a reliable source making all of those claims together—really, for a huge claim like that, you'd need multiple since big claims require big evidence, which I don't really see happening since the reliable sources cited on Afsharid Iran all call it Iran or something analogous.

Once again, please take a moment to read these pages I've been linking about what reliable sources are and aren't, what verifiability is, and how we keep a neutral point of view on Wikipedia—they helped me understand things much better when I started editing. Remsense诉 18:42, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I would appreciate it if you could provide sources that say Afshars are of Persian origin. Also, the term "Afsharid Iran" is Regional, not ethnic. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 18:49, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

And "Persian victory" is precisely the same. There's a footnote right next to the word "Iranian" in the first sentence of Afsharid Iran. Remsense诉 18:51, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

How accurate is it to call the Afshars "Iranians" just because they were founded in the Iranian region? The Mughals were founded in the Indian region, shouldn't they be called "Mughal India" and "Indian Victory"? AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 18:59, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I would call the Mughals an Indian empire, yes. Remsense诉 19:08, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

But the Mughals are not called the Indian empire. Like Gokturks were not called Mongols or Chinese.

It is not right to call a state Iranian just because it was founded in Iran, or to call it Indian just because it was founded in India. I request that Afshars not be called Iranians on any Wikipedia page. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 19:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Afsharids are of Turkish origin. Afsharids are considered one of the Turkmen tribes. Historically, they migrated from Central Asia and settled in Anatolia. Afshars played an important role in the establishment and aftermath of the Ottoman Empire. However, over time, they assimilated into Ottoman society like other Turkmen tribes. Today, Afshars still live in Turkey and some other Turkish countries. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 18:12, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Do you want me to give you safe sources? AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 18:18, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Did you read my comment? No one is denying that the Afshars are of Turkic stock... HistoryofIran (talk) 18:34, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. HistoryofIran (talk) 16:45, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I understand. Check out the post I made on your talk page. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 17:57, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. HistoryofIran (talk) 18:32, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

March 2024

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 18:38, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Sources

These are the sources HistoryofIran provided—they were in a box that the user has to click to expand, so I assume you did not know to do this.

Azerbaijani was not an ethnonym back then, let alone a nation, so please stop adding it and its 20th-century Latin transliteration to random articles

• "Russian sources cited in this study refer to the Turkish-speaking Muslims (Shi’a and Sunni) as “Tatars” or, when coupled with the Kurds (except the Yezidis), as “Muslims.” The vast majority of the Muslim population of the province was Shi’a. Unlike the Armenians and Georgians, the Tatars did not have their own alphabet and used the Arabo-Persian script. After 1918, and especially during the Soviet era, this group identified itself as Azerbaijani." -- Bournoutian, George (2018). Armenia and Imperial Decline: The Yerevan Province, 1900-1914. Routledge. p. 35 (note 25).
• "The third major nation in South Caucasia,19 the Azerbaijanis, hardly existed as an ethnic group, let alone a nation, before the twentieth century. The inhabitants of the territory now occupied by Azerbaijan defined themselves as Muslims, members of the Muslim umma; or as Turks, members of a language group spread over a vast area of Central Asia; or as Persians (the founder of Azerbaijani literature, Mirza Fath’ Ali Akhundzadä, described himself as ‘almost Persian’). ‘Azerbaijani identity remained fluid and hybrid’ comments R. G. Suny (1999–2000: 160). As late as 1900, the Azerbaijanis remained divided into six tribal groups – the Airumy, Karapapakh, Pavlari, Shakhsereny, Karadagtsy and Afshavy. The key period of the formation of the Azerbaijani nation lies between the 1905 revolution and the establishment of the independent People’s Republic of Azerbaijan in 1918 (Altstadt, 1992: 95)." -- Ben Fowkes (2002). Ethnicity and Conflict in the Post-Communist World. Palgrave Macmillan. p. 14
• "As hinted earlier, the history of Azerbaijan and of the growth of an Azerbaijani ethnie is more problematic than the other two cases. The lack of a clear way of differentiating between the various Turkic languages spoken and written in medieval and early modern times is one of the difficulties. Another is the absence until the twentieth century of an Azerbaijani state." -- idem, p. 35
• "In the case of the third major ethnic group of South Caucasus, the Azerbaijanis, the path towards nationhood was strewn with obstacles. First, there was uncertainty about Azerbaijani ethnic identity, which was a result of the influence of Azerbaijan’s many and varied pre-Russian conquerors, starting with the Arabs in the mid-seventh century and continuing with the Saljuq Turks, the Mongols, the Ottoman Turks and the Iranians. Hence the relatively small local intelligentsia wavered between Iranian, Ottoman, Islamic, and pan-Turkic orientations. Only a minority supported a specifically Azerbaijani identity, as advocated most prominently by Färidun bäy Köchärli." -- idem, p. 68
• "Azerbaijani national identity emerged in post-Persian Russian-ruled East Caucasia at the end of the nineteenth century, and was finally forged during the early Soviet period." -- Gasimov, Zaur (2022). "Observing Iran from Baku: Iranian Studies in Soviet and Post-Soviet Azerbaijan". Iranian Studies. 55 (1): page 37
• "In fact, the change in defining national identity in Azerbaijan was a result of a combination of developments in the 1930s in Turkey, Iran, Germany, and the Soviet Union. The article concludes that these developments left Soviet rulers no choice but to construct an independent Azerbaijani identity." -- Harun Yilmaz (2013). "The Soviet Union and the Construction of Azerbaijani National Identity in the 1930s". Iranian Studies. 46 (4). p. 511
• "A group of Azerbaijani nationalist elites, led by M.A. Rasulzada, declared independence for the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic (ADR) on 28 May 1918. After a century of Russian colonial rule, the emergent Azerbaijani nation established its first nation-state. Not only was it a new state but also it was a new nation. Because they previously had lacked a distinct national identity, the Azerbaijani Turks had been called “Caucasian Muslims” or “Tatars,” a common term used for the subject Muslim population in the Tsarist Russian empire (Мишиjeв, 1987, p. 159). The Azerbaijani identity and nation were new constructions of nationalists of the late 19th century, culminating in the establishment of the ADR." Ahmadoghlu, R. Secular nationalist revolution and the construction of the Azerbaijani identity, nation and state. Nations and Nationalism. 2021; 27. Wiley Online Library. p. 549
• "Azerbaijan first tried to create a national identity in 1918 at the time of the formation of the first Azerbaijan republic. Because of linguistic factors and despite its deep and long connection with Iran, Azerbaijan constructed its identity on the basis of Turkism and even pan-Turkism." Eldar Mamedov (2017). The New Geopolitics of the South Caucasus: Prospects for Regional Cooperation and Conflict Resolution: Azerbaijan Twenty-Five Years after Independence: Accomplishments and Shortcomings. Edited by Shireen Hunter. Lexington Books. p. 29
• "In the pre-national era, both north and the south of the Aras River (Shervan, Mughan, Qarabagh, and Azerbaijan) were provinces, akin to Lorestan or Khorasan of an all-Iranian imperial structure. Following the Russian conquest of the Turkic-speaking regions in the South Caucasus in the nineteenth century, a thin layer of intelligentsia emerged in Baku and began discussing the characteristics of a distinct Azerbaijani identity. The Republic of Azerbaijan was established in May 1918 by the same elite. This short experience was abruptly halted when the Red Army occupied Transcaucasia in 1920/21. Subsequently, the Bolsheviks launched their modern, state-driven nation building projects in Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Georgia. Contemporary Azerbaijanis are Turkic-speakers and their national history could be centered on a Turkic ethno-linguistic identity. Nevertheless, for reasons discussed elsewhere, the Bolsheviks did not prefer this solution. The Azerbaijani national identity and historical narrative constructed after 1937 stressed the indigenous nature of the Azerbaijani people and was based on a territorial definition. The territorial approach found support at the highest level—from Joseph Stalin himself." -- Yilmaz, H. (2015). A Family Quarrel: Azerbaijani Historians against Soviet Iranologists. Iranian Studies, 48(5), p. 770
• "Even as the ethnogenesis of the Azerbaijanis continues to be a matter of academic debate, most scholars agree that Azerbaijan, as a national entity, emerged after 1918, with the declaration of the first Republic of Azerbaijan after Word War I" -- p. 585, Gippert, Jost and Dum-Tragut, Jasmine. Caucasian Albania: An International Handbook, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 2023.
• "At the beginning of the 20th century, the heavily used name “Turks” for the Muslims of eastern Caucasus was replaced by the term “Azerbaijani.” It has dominated since the 1930s as a result of the Soviet policy of indigenization, largely promoted by Josef Stalin" - p. 254, After the Soviet Empire. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 05 Oct. 2015.
• "Besides Azerbaijan, which as a historical territory in the 12th century has been illustrated in the maps of that era as an area in modern northwestern Iran and distinguished from Arrān, we should mention the term “Azerbaijani”. Prior to the late 19th century and early 20th century, the term “Azerbaijani” and “Azerbaijani Turk” had never been used as an ethnonym. Such ethnonyms did not exist. During the 19th century and early 20th century, Russian sources primarily referred to the Turcophone Muslim population as “Tatars” which was a general term that included a variety of Turkish speaker. Under the Mussavatist government, in 1918 and during the establishment of the Democratic Republic of Azerbaijan, the term “Azeri people” referred to all inhabitants while the Turkish-speaking portion was called “Azeri Turk”. Thus the concept of an Azeri identity barely appears at all before 1920 and Azerbaijan before this era had been a simple geographical area." -- pp. 16-17, Lornejad, Siavash; Doostzadeh, Ali (2012). Arakelova, Victoria; Asatrian, Garnik (eds.). On the modern politicization of the Persian poet Nezami Ganjavi (PDF). Caucasian Centre for Iranian Studies.
• "Until the late 19th and early 20th century it would be unthinkable to refer to the Muslim inhabitants of the Caucasus as Azaris (Azeris) or Azerbaijanis, since the people and the geographical region that bore these names were located to the south of the Araxes River. Therefore, the Iranian intelligentsia raised eyebrows once the independent Republic of Azerbaijan was declared in 1918 just across the Iranian border. - pp. 176-177, Avetikian, Gevorg. "Pān-torkism va Irān [Pan-Turkism and Iran]", Iran and the Caucasus 14, 1 (2010), Brill
• "The ethno-genesis of the Azerbaijani nation can thus be traced, in a formal, bureaucratic manner at least, to the late 1930s. Hardly unique in the history of the Soviet or other states, the Azerbaijani case demonstrates the logic of Stalinist national-state construction, whereby the formation of a Soviet republic named Azerbaijan required the existence of an Azerbaijani nation to inhabit it." p. 229, Monuments and Identities in the Caucasus Karabagh, Nakhichevan and Azerbaijan in Contemporary Geopolitical Conflict, Brill
• "The South Caucasian Muslims lacked clear cultural or religious boundaries as late as the nineteenth century. Divided into Shiʿa and Sunni populations, with a vernacular language close to Turkish and a literary language still dominated by Persian and then Ottoman Turkish, with no prior experience of statehood and no overall delimitation of the historical homeland, they had to define a separate identity. That construction essentially took place under Soviet rule and on the basis of a Soviet political agenda, even though its Pan-Turkist agenda predates that period and appears to have been influenced by some of the Ottoman leaders, in particular Enver Pasha and his younger half-brother, Nuri Pasha. The latter was in fact in Elisavetpol (Gandja) just before the proclamation of independence and subsequently formed the Islamic Army of the Caucasus which captured Baku in mid-September 1918. In a way, imperialism built the nation, its historiography, and its identity. Earlier processes also contributed to these developments: the tsarist territorial subdivisions of Transcaucasia in the 19th century, the growth of Baku, Armenian-Azeri economic antagonisms, and the Armenian-Tatar War" idem, pp. 232-233

Azerbaijan was not a name in the Caucasus at that time either.

• "Let us conclude with an important point. The pre-1918 maps indicate various names of regions or states north of the river Araxes, such as “Albania” or “Arran”. No map knows of “Azerbaijan” north of the Araxes. This name was applied for centuries to the northern province of Iran, originally called Atropatene, around Tabriz, i.e. south of the Araxes. The Encyclopaedia of Islam published in 1913 leaves no room for doubt: “Nowadays, under ‘Adharbaydjan’ is understood the north-western province of Persia”. The name “Azerbaijan”, which the present-day republic adopted in 1918, is, therefore, a result of later socio-political developments.In the 1930s, this name was adopted by the Soviet authorities: it suited Stalin who considered expansion to Iran" - p. 42, Monuments and Identities in the Caucasus Karabagh, Nakhichevan and Azerbaijan in Contemporary Geopolitical Conflict, Brill
• "The name Azarbaijan is a pre-Islamic Persian name for a pre-Islamic province south of the River Aras. “Azarbaijan” was not used in any definite or clear manner for the area north of the River Aras in the pre- modern period. In some instances, the name Azarbaijan was used in a manner that included the Aran region immediately to the north of the River Aras, but this was rather an exception. The adoption of this name for the area north of the River Aras was by the nationalist, Baku-based Mosavat government (1918–20) and was later retained by the Soviet Union." p. 16 - Behrooz, Maziar (2023). Iran at War: Interactions with the Modern World and the Struggle with Imperial Russia. I.B. Tauris
• "In fact, in medieval times the name ‘Azerbaijan’ was applied not to the area of present independent Azerbaijan but to the lands to the south of the Araxes river, now part of Iran. The lands to the north west of the Araxes were known as Albania; the lands to the north east, the heart of present-day post-Soviet Azerbaijan, were known as Sharvan (or Shirwan) and Derbend." p. 30, Fowkes, B. (2002). Ethnicity and Ethnic Conflict in the Post-Communist World. Springer.
• "The adoption of the name “Azerbaijan” in 1918 by the Mussavatist government for classical Caucasian Albania (Arrān and Sharvān) was due to political reasons28. For example, the giant orientalist of the early 20th century, Vasily Barthold has stated: “… whenever it is necessary to choose a name that will encompass all regions of the republic of Azerbaijan, the name Arrān can be chosen. But the term Azerbaijan was chosen because when the Azerbaijan republic was created, it was assumed that this and the Persian Azerbaijan will be one entity, because the population of both has a big similarity. On this basis, the word Azerbaijan was chosen. Of course right now when the word Azerbaijan is used, it has two meanings as Persian Azerbaijan and as a republic, it’s confusing and a question rises as to which Azerbaijan is being talked about”. In the post-Islamic sense, Arrān and Sharvān are often distinguished while in the pre-Islamic era, Arrān or the Western Caucasian Albania roughly corresponds to the modern territory of republic of Azerbaijan. In the Soviet era, in a breathtaking manipulation, historical Azerbaijan (NW Iran) was reinterpreted as “South Azerbaijan” in order for the Soviets to lay territorial claim on historical Azerbaijan proper which is located in modern Northwestern Iran". p. 10, Lornejad, Siavash; Doostzadeh, Ali (2012). Arakelova, Victoria; Asatrian, Garnik (eds.). On the modern politicization of the Persian poet Nezami Ganjavi (PDF). Caucasian Centre for Iranian Studies.
• "The case of Azerbaijan is interesting in several aspects. The geographical name “Azerbaijan” for the territory where the Republic of Azerbaijan is now situated, as well as the ethnic name for the Caucasian Turks, “Azerbaijani,” were coined in the beginning of the 10th century. The name Azerbaijan, which implies the lands located north of the Aras River, is a duplicate of the historical region of Azerbaijan (it is the arabized version of the name of a historical region of Atropatena) which is the north-western region of Iran. After the proclamation of the first Republic of Azerbaijan in 1918, the Turkish army invaded the Caucasus, and the name “Azerbaijan” was offered by a young Turkish regime to the Turkish-speaking territory" p. 253, After the Soviet Empire. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 05 Oct. 2015.
• "The Ottoman Turks coveted Iran’s province of Azerbaijan. Therefore following the Bolshevik revolution, in 1918 installed a pro-Turkish government in Baku and named it after the Iranian province of Azerbaijan" - p. xvii, The New Geopolitics of the South Caucasus: Prospects for Regional Cooperation and Conflict Resolution (Contemporary Central Asia: Societies, Politics, and Cultures), Lexington Books, Shireen Hunter
• "Until 1918, when the Musavat regime decided to name the newly independent state Azerbaijan, this designation had been used exclusively to identify the Iranian province of Azerbaijan." - p. 60, Dekmejian, R. Hrair; Simonian, Hovann H. (2003). Troubled Waters: The Geopolitics of the Caspian Region. I.B. Tauris.
• "The region to the north of the river Araxes was not called Azerbaijan prior to 1918, unlike the region in northwestern Iran that has been called since so long ago." p. 356, Rezvani, Babak (2014). Ethno-territorial conflict and coexistence in the caucasus, Central Asia and Fereydan: academisch proefschrift. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press
• "The name Azerbaijan was also adopted for Arrān, historically an Iranian region, by anti-Russian separatist forces of the area when, on 26 May 1918, they declared its independence and called it the Democratic Republic of Azerbaijan. To allay Iranian concerns, the Azerbaijan government used the term “Caucasian Azerbaijan” in the documents for circulation abroad." - Multiple Authors, Encyclopaedia Iranica
• "Originally the term Azerbaijan was the name of the Iranian historical province Adarbaigan, or Azarbaijan (from older Aturpatakan) in the north-west of the country. This term, as well as its respective derivative, Azari (or, in Turkish manner, Azeri), as “ethnonym”, was not applied to the territory north of Arax (i.e. the area of the present-day Azerbaijan Republic, former Arran and Shirvan) and its inhabitants up until the establishment of the Musavat regime in that territory (1918-1920)." - p. 85, note 1, Morozova, I. (2005). Contemporary Azerbaijani Historiography on the Problem of "Southern Azerbaijan" after World War II, Iran and the Caucasus, 9(1)
• "Until the late 19th and early 20th century it would be unthinkable to refer to the Muslim inhabitants of the Caucasus as Azaris (Azeris) or Azerbaijanis, since the people and the geographical region that bore these names were located to the south of the Araxes River. Therefore, the Iranian intelligentsia raised eyebrows once the independent Republic of Azerbaijan was declared in 1918 just across the Iranian border. - pp. 176-177, Avetikian, Gevorg. "Pān-torkism va Irān [Pan-Turkism and Iran]", Iran and the Caucasus 14, 1 (2010), Brill

Sources routinely refer Nader Shah as "Iranian/Persian". No, that does mean he was of Iranian stock. But clearly shows his Turkic ancestry is irrelevant in context like this. The nation he ruled was Guarded Domains of Iran, not "Azerbaijan"

• Osterhammel, Jürgen (2019). Unfabling the East: The Enlightenment's Encounter with Asia. Princeton University Press. p. 68, "...that fully a third of the army of the Iranian conqueror, Nadir (Nader) Shah..."
• Esposito, John L., (ed) (2004). The Oxford Dictionary of Islam. Oxford University Press. p. 71, "In the conflicts following the death of the Iranian ruler Nadir Shah in 1747..."
• Asher, Catherine Blanshard; Asher, Catherine Ella Blanshard; Asher, Catherine B. (1992). Architecture of Mughal India. Cambridge University Press. p. 301, "...the Iranian ruler Nadir Shah invaded Delhi."
• Tucker, Spencer C., (ed.) (2019). Middle East Conflicts from Ancient Egypt to the 21st Century: An Encyclopedia and Document Collection. ABC-CLIO. p. 695, "...the army of Persian ruler Nadir Shah and Ottoman Empire forces under Yegen Mehmet Pasha."
• Alam, Muzaffar; Subrahmanyam, Sanjay (2007). Indo-Persian Travels in the Age of Discoveries, 1400-1800. Cambridge University Press. p. 245, "...invasion of North India by the Iranian conqueror, Nadir Shah Afshar."
• Schwartz, Schwartz Kevin L. (2020). Remapping Persian Literary History, 1700-1900. Edinburgh University Press. "...on the triumphs and heroics of the Iranian ruler Nadir Shah (r. 1736–47)."
• Emon, Anver M.; Ahmed, Rumee., (ed.) (2018). The Oxford Handbook of Islamic Law. Oxford University Press. p. 495, "...Iranian Afsharid ruler, Nadir Shah (r. 1736–47)..."
• Hofmeester, Karin; Grewe, Bernd-Stefan (2016). Luxury in Global Perspective: Objects and Practices, 1600–2000. Cambridge University Press. p. 27, "...the Persian ruler Nadir Shah (ruled 1736–47) had invaded northern India."
• Kaicker, Abhishek (2020). The King and the People: Sovereignty and Popular Politics in Mughal Delhi. Oxford University Press. p. 18, "Persian ruler Nadir Shah's invasion of the Mughal empire in 1739..."
• Hodgson, Marshall G. S. (2009). The Venture of Islam, Volume 3: The Gunpower Empires and Modern Times. University of Chicago Press. p. 146, "...Iranian ruler Nadir Shah had sacked Delhi..."
• Embree, Ainslie T. (2020). Frontiers into Borders: Defining South Asia States, 1757–1857. Oxford University Press, "...Central Asia fell to the great Persian conqueror, Nadir Shah..."
• Wink, André (2020). The Making of the Indo-Islamic World: c.700–1800 CE. Cambridge University Press. p. 15, "...the Persian conqueror Nadir Shah."

Remsense诉 14:16, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. HistoryofIran (talk) 21:03, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Ok. have a nice day. AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 21:08, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Downward spiral

Hello AzerbaijaniQizilbash. I have watched your ANI with concern. In your case, I understand you may have a deep sense of resentment and confusion about what you are being accused of. I would like to note that Wikipedia runs on the basis of sources being verifiably true. See WP:RSN for sources that have been debated as 'reliable'.

Il also copy accross my response on ANI to here, since I think in your current position you may not have taken ample time to read it: @AzerbaijaniQizilbash, Are you aware on Wikipedia, you cite the book/website you got the information from via the <ref> functions?

Like this: <ref> (link to book book or article, page number, publish date)</.ref> .

On the topic of your attitude, again, you seem greatly frustrated and angry. Consequently, I suggest cooling off for a bit and take a wikibreak.

On the other hand, if your intent here is to intentionally distort facts and knowledge, understand you are going to be dropkicked off the site by its editors, regardless of your feelings.

Warm regards, ASmallMapleLeaf (talk) 15:23, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay AzerbaijaniQizilbash (talk) 16:04, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

March 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Courcelles (talk) 16:27, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

I think TPA is on the verge of being revolked too, as seen here. The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1^{(The Garage)} 16:41, 11 March 2024 (UTC)