Talk:Abd al-Rahman al-Sufi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Was he Shi'a? My neutral estimate now indicates that medieval moslem astronomers were mostly shi'a from Persia from the expansion of Islam till about 11th century, when it switched to sunni from Al-Andalus, but that's probably a western bias, since only surviving science counts as known and the Al-Andalus was conquered by West, and so its science. Said: Rursus () 12:02, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

@Rususl: why do you guys have to make fool of yourselves all the time? Al- Sufi is an Arab not a persian... You think every scholar with a muslim name is from Iran. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:38, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

@unsigned: First of all, please spell Rursus's name properly: it's Rursus, not Rususl. Also, why hide behind an anonymous IP address? I don't want to start a war here, but it's called respect. So you ask why Rursus thinks Al Sufi was Persian/Iranian? Well, let's see... He was born in Iran (Rey), died in Iran (Shiraz), and observed in Iran. To me and to Wikipedia, that's Iranian/Persian! CielProfond (talk) 17:49, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Because he was mentioned as a Persian nobleman in Patrick Moore's book The Guinness Book of Astronomy 1979 edition. I also see that my question regarding Shi'a vs. Sunni seems to have gotten the answer "Sufi". Arabic was then the lingua franca for the trades and the science in the Islamic Golden Age, so identifying his nationality is not immediately obvious from his name. He also was dependent on and supported by the Buyid dynasty, which was either Daylimite or Kurdish. ;^) Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 08:43, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Patrick Moore's book is scarcely definitive on such an issue, if I may say. That said, he is usually considered Persian, and I think you will find that his name (and that of his father) indicates he was Sunni. Skeptic2 (talk) 01:25, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Reference and referenced information removed?[edit]

Why was this source removed,"Abd al-Rahman al-Sufi, H. Suter, E.J. Brill's First Encyclopaedia of Islam 1913-1936, Vol. I, (Brill, 1987), 57."????

This sentence, "Similar to many other Islamic scholars of non-Arab ethnic origin and due to the use of Arabic as a lingua franca in his time, sometimes, he is referred to as an "Arab" astronomer." is original research and will be removed, since it is not supported by the Encyclopaedia of Islam reference.

I would strongly suggest an explanation of said edits or an Admin will be notified. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:03, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Actually, the Encyclopaedia of Islam reference wasn't removed - it's now ref 4, if you bother to look. And in any case that source is not clear-cut on the matter. Anoushirvan's edits make this entry consistent with the Wikipedia article on the Book of Fixed Stars, which describes al-Sufi as Persian. You will find support for that view in the ref by Hafez, Stephenson, and Orchiston given in the Book of Fixed Stars entry. CielProfond (above) explains why al-Sufi should be considered Persian under Wikipedia rules.Skeptic2 (talk) 04:14, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Actually it(EoI) was used to promote Anoushirvan's opinion. Feel free to read that sentence.
Strange I see no sources in the Book of Fixed Stars article stating he was Persian??
"The Book of Fixed Stars (in Arabic: كتاب صور الكواكب /kitab suwar al kawakib/) is an astronomical text[1] written by Abd al-Rahman al-Sufi (Azophi) around 964. The book was written in Arabic, although the author himself was Persian. It was an attempt to create a synthesis of the most popular classical work of astronomy – Ptolemy’s Almagest – with the indigenous Arabic tradition, or Anwa." Note there is NO footnote numbering after Persian. So your "logic" for user:Anoushirvan actions does not seem plausible, much less his opinionated original research sentence.
And even if there is a source stating he is Persian, since Encyclopaedia of Islam states he is Arab then it too has to be included. Which is part of "Wikipedia rules".
Also, since you are into the "consistancy" issue you might want to remove the nonsense about the "Persian" Buyids, or had you not checked that article? --Kansas Bear (talk) 04:52, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Sir, temper your mind and your language and don't regard Wikipedia as a place of nationalistic or any one-sided race. As you were informed by another user (user Sceptic2) on the talk page, you did not even realize that I had maintained your source. Furthermore, you did not consider at all the FACT - substantiated in any research - that the Buyids - whom you refer to with the non academic words "the nonsense about the "Persian" Buyids" - were Iranians. Moreover, you did not consider the fact that Azophi lived at the core of Persia and worked and lived at the named Persian court. Your threatening to contact an administrator against users despite the fact that you have changed "Persian" to "Arabic" after many many other authors who had mainained "Persian" and the fact that you did not read my changes - as is clear above - is a serious hint at a possible lack of scientific and encyclopaedial interest in the matter and a more one-sided or nationalistic view - as far as I can see. You don't even try to see the compromise and are trying to lead a war in Wikipedia: It is not war! Wikipedia is not the place of "I will notify an administrator if you don't do what I say." --Anoushirvan (talk) 14:08, 11 January 2014 (UTC)--Anoushirvan (talk) 15:06, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Removal of referenced information and replacing it with your own personal opinion regarding Arab ethnicity, as you did, is disruptive editing. As such a warning to report it to an Admin is quite appropriate. As for the Buyids, I prefer to go by what the sources state, as such presenting them as Persian is undue weight, since the article clearly states they were either Dailamite or Kurdish. As for compromise, if a source can be found stating al-Sufi was Persian then it as well as Arab should be listed(the same way it ethnicity is found in the Buyid article). As for "nationalism", I'm not the one that replaced the Arab ethnicity(which was sourced) with Persian ethnicity that has no source or cherry picked sources from the Buyid article to present them as Persian. --Kansas Bear (talk) 15:53, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
KB, you say above "Strange I see no sources in the Book of Fixed Stars article stating he was Persian??". Well, you cannot have looked. I gave the source in that article, which I state again is the one by Hafez, Stephenson, and Orchiston. To save you the trouble of clicking on and reading it, I will quote from it: "The Book of the Fixed Stars was written by the Persian astronomer Abdul-Rahman al-Sufi...". This is the first sentence of the Abstract, so you wouldn't have far to read. These authors are a modern and reliable source, as is Rob Van Gent. From what I see, Anoushirvan's edits are entirely fair, accurate and well-sourced. Rather than threaten to call the cops, I'd suggest you withdraw. Skeptic2 (talk) 17:08, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Sir, as you probably know and is reflected and elaborated in many Wikipedia languages, the term "Persian" may be understood in a more general sense and refer to other Iranian peoples in history such as Lurs, Kurds and others as well - what can be based on the aspect of intermarriage and many other factors which cannot be all made clear in each case. Of course, it would be possible to give those refernces here too (as in the article on Buyids). However, some references reflect the language learned by Buyid rulers (not their Dailamite or Kurdish ancestors). I would not reject any elaboration on this - as done in the Buyid article. As to other points I hope that I don't need to assume any nationalistic views on your side, but your argumentation and the FACT that you did state that your reference had been removed by my person and that this was NOT the case could possibly propose a one-sided perspective on your side - you did not seem to have read my change completely in order to realize that your reference had been mainained - as already said by user Sceptic2; "disruptive editing" would be something else and should not be postulated and used as reproach without reading the text completely. I improved the article after your changes and it is a compromise based on facts regarding the question "Arab" or "Persian". Of course, I think that both peoples have contributed to civilization in many ways.--Anoushirvan (talk) 16:56, 11 January 2014 (UTC)--Anoushirvan (talk) 17:10, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

We've established that he was Persian but was also known as an Arab, so let's leave well enough alone. The Brill Encyclopedia of Islam is ambiguous about the matter, probably deliberately so.Skeptic2 (talk) 08:53, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
BTW, Ihsan Hafez of James Cook University, Australia, has studied this more closely than any of us. On p.6 of his PhD thesis he says: “He [al-Sufi]] was a Muslim and a Persian astronomer who wrote all his works in Arabic.” Download it here and read it: Skeptic2 (talk) 10:06, 12 January 2014 (UTC)


I checked all four sources that the references next to the word Arab refer to, and in none of them his origin in mentioned.

This scholar seems to be Persian and not Arab.

The referenced sources speculating he was Persian are valid and promising. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:10, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Having read most of the conversation on this talk page, I am at a loss to understand why the article still includes the term "or Arab". A Persian scientist, born in Iran, lived in Iran and died in Iran. Is that not incontrovertible?? Kamran the Great (talk) 04:17, 7 December 2016 (UTC)