Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-Persianism by Arabs

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by LukasPietsch (talk | contribs) at 18:01, 29 May 2006 (→‎[[Anti-Persianism by Arabs]]: resp to Adambiswanger (after edit conflict)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Anti-Persianism by Arabs

There are a couple of thousand ethnicities in the world, and we can guess mostly every one of them has some animosities towards any two or three of its neighbours. So, let's have a bunch of 10,000 or so new articles of the format "Anti-X'ism by Y", listing all the world's complaints and injured prides, from unjust conquests a thousand years ago to unfair football fans and world-domination conspiracies today. I'll gladly make a start with "Anti-Württembergism by Badenese", taking the abovementioned essay as a model, as it is meticulously sourced, highly original and refreshingly frank in the way it spins all those disparate yarns into a coherent new synthesis of ethnic animosity. Not. -- Lukas (T.|@) 08:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm concerned by the obvious anti-crapism of this AfD nominator...Delete! While the material in the article seems very well-sourced, it's irreparably POV. -- Scientizzle 08:35, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete "Anti-Persianism" gets 10 hits on Google. I'd agree that there has been animosity between Persians and Arabs in the past (under the Umayyads -- the Abbasids, who overthrew them, were allied with Persians) and recently (state-formation in Iraq, Iran-Iraq War, hostility between Sunni and Shi'a revived), but the article conflates past and present in a historically illegitimate way. It ignores twelve centuries of minimal or no friction between Arabs and Persians. IMHO, the section of older history is also grotesquely slanted and inaccurate. See the talk pages of Islamicization in post-conquest Iran for discussion of Umayyad language policies, etc. Material on oppression of Shi'a and Iraqis of Iranian background under Saddam is interesting (and depressing), but belongs in modern history of Iraq articles. Zora 08:53, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep If articles like Anti-Arabism and Anti-Semitism are okay then the topic is fair game as long as it is sourced. Term "Anti-Persianism" gets exactly 506 hits on Google and "Anti-Persian" gets 655. Maybe it could be renamed "Anti-Persian racism" which gets 453,000 hits on Google. Racism and bigotry cannot be denied or ignored, which is what it seems LukasPietsch wants to do. Khorshid 09:09, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You need to put quotes around "Anti-Persianism" or you're going to be pulling up sites that don't actually contain the full term. Zora 10:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Excuse me for being maybe a bit paranoid, but are you a duplicate account by any chance? Account created just 8 hours before this nomination, less than 10 edits, none to this article - just how did you find this nomination within half an hour of its creation? Lukas (T.|@) 13:25, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It is worthwhile looking at the reasons why this article was created [1] and also how widely the term "anti-Persianism" is used [2] - the only evidence for the use of this term is once in one article [3], but some of the material in this opinion piece has been copied and pasted into the "anti-Persianism" article, as I pointed out here [4]. Out of 12 hits on Google, three are related to this article, indicating that this is original research. The chief problem I have is that this article interprets many actions against Iran as anti-Persian racism, when in fact only 50% of the population of Iran is ethnically Persian and these actions have political motives rather than racial ones. Criticism or actions against the Iranian state by Arab governments appear to be deemed anti-Persianism in this article. I suspect that the reason why "anti-Iranian" and "anti-Persian" are conflated is precisely because there is little evidence to support this polemic. There is more evidence to support an article on "anti-Iranianism" [5], although it would have to be broader than just sentiments expressed in the Arab world. At present, the article seems like nationalist posturing.--الأهواز 10:55, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't like the idea of "Anti-Iranianism" because then there is more than just a single ethnic group. There is definitely racism against Persians so I think renaming the article is a good idea, but it should stay focused on anti-Persian ideas. Problem with "Anti-Iranianism" is also that "Iranian" in this way only means citizens of the country of Iran, and not any ethnic groups. There might be some hatred because of that, being citizen of Iran, but the hatred is more directed against Persians, and not so much against other groups. So the aim of the article is valid since widespread racism exists in the Arab world - and especially Saudi Arabia, UAE, Yemen, Bahrain - against Persians and anyone seen as being "Persian" or "Persian-like". Khorshid 11:44, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment... I am a little bothered by having Anti-Arabism and not this... not sure why (I don't know the subject well at all... just that there is mutual animosity that pops up from time to time)... It does get more google hits but... it is possible that the terminology is not as singular as with anti-Arabism... are there many different terms, maybe? I do think the article is not very good. It conflates anecdotal evidence into a tale.... I mean... quoting traditions like this does is quite dangerous... we need to be quoting secondary scholarship not trying to make our own (and if anti-Arabism suffers from the same problems they should be fixed as well). Are there any academic (relatively) non-partisan works on this? The only ones this seems to cite are related to Iran and not Persians in general... I don't vote delete because I don't know if there is scholarship on this... but, this article is dangerous because it masquerades as being fact when... well, it's just not. And sadly, I think non-neutral articles are looking more sophisticated and escaping scrutiny. gren グレン 11:41, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Khorshid Crazynas 12:20, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per norm. Valid topic. --K a s h Talk | email 13:13, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Uhhmmm, excuse me, keep per what? Lukas (T.|@) 13:20, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
* Comment: Uhmrmmmphmhm. You are excused. The topic is valid, its the title that may need changing. --K a s h Talk | email 14:45, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Telex 14:06, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. term appears in only one article.--JChap 14:14, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Delete. As most (if not all) of the information from the article is original research, inaccurate, and is extremely biased. It's nothing more than a political polemic, also the subject isn't notable enough to be worthy of an article, espescially of this size. --Inahet 15:23, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I think the key issue here is whether or not this is a notable social phenominon. I think it is, the article may need to be mantained by a more diverse group of editors. I think and RfC would suit this article more than a AfD. HighInBC 15:56, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep --Terence Ong 16:12, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to Anti-Persian sentiments by Arabs. Also perhaps the article could be expanded to include other people like Azeris and Balochis, so the title could also be Anti-Iran sentiments by Arabs. —Khoikhoi 17:31, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why just anti-Iranian sentiments by Arabs? As one editor stated on the talk page said "sentiments against IRAN and/or its inhabitants can have many causes and have been ubiquitously prevalent at different points in time, during the last two and a half millennia. Be it Babylon or Egypt or Greece in Antiquity, or the Arab Caliphates, as well as India, Afghanistan and the Ottoman Empire in more recent times." [6] I don't understand why this is being protrayed as some kind of civilisational conflict between Persians and Arabs when Iran is an ethnically diverse country and there are many other disputes concerning Iranians and non-Arab countries.--الأهواز 17:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Both you and I know that today many Arabs have shown prejustice towards Iranians and vice versa. Just look at soccer games between Arab and Iranian teems. It's just like watching a game between India and Pakistan. The point it's a notable topic, and deserves to be mentioned. —Khoikhoi 17:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This article contains notable and factual information that is not present in any other articles. The phrasing and title of the idea conveyed "anti-persianism by arabs" is irrelevant. All previous arguments presented against this article seem to either quibble about the title of the article or bemoan the "irreparable" state of the organization and tone. Unless it is original research, the premise of the article, not content, should dictate its fate. I find the cumbersome title and POV style to be irrelevant in the discussion. Adambiswanger1 17:50, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, but the "premise" is exactly it. The premise of this article is that "Anti-Persianism" (or whatever you call it) is a unified phenomenon across the eras, providing a single interpretative framework for each and every real or perceived grievance Persians have against Arabs, from mistreatments during and after the Islamic conquest, to the behaviour of football fans today. And this idea, I believe, is indeed irreparably original research and tendentious, no matter how well the details are sourced. Lukas (T.|@) 18:01, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete because this opens the door for a load of POVforks that are unencyclopedic IMHO. Also, I must agree with scientizzle. M1ss1ontomars2k4 (T | C | @) 17:58, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Anti-Persianism_by_Arabs&oldid=55770898"