Talk:Persecution of Zoroastrians

message: I wanted to remind everyone of this. Unless an action, or view, or law (etc.) is specifically labeled as "persecution" (by a reliable source), it should not be in this article. This article is about persecution of Zoroastrians, not unfair acts against them, or anything that is not persecution. To be "persecution" it must be called "persecution" by a reliable source (preferably multiple ones). This is an accordance with consensus on Wikipedia_talk:No_original_research/Archive_34#Persecution. Thanks.Bless sins (talk) 14:33, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please refer to the sources cited in the article. The article is in its very crude form yet to say the least you will find more sources and info soon. None of what has been presented constitutes original research. You are most welcome to provide sources to the contrary. However calling for the article to be deleted is down right prejudiced. The truth does not change depending on someone's ability to digest it Saroshp (talk) 08:09, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Is the comparison to Judaism really necessary in the intro? It just seems very out of place and biased to me (yes, I am Jewish...no, I do not focus my identity on the persecution of fellow Jews) 69.242.72.55 (talk) 04:12, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Persecution" 

message: Please note: This label is meant to indicate that a discussion is still going on, and that the article's content is disputed, and volatile. If you add this template to an article in which you see a bias about which there is no discussion underway, you need at least to leave a note on the article's talk page describing what you consider unacceptable about the article. The note should address the troubling passages, elements, or phrases specifically enough to encourage constructive discussion that leads to resolution. ---- WP:NPOV
Please specify Saroshp (talk) 09:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV tag

message: The economicexpert article states at the bottom
This article is from Wikipedia licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Zoroastrianism".
The list of all authors is available under this link.
The article can be editted here.
You can also see that it parallels the wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoroastrianism as it appeared circa December 2004. I didn't look for the exact day the article was copied. See this link for a similar version on wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zoroastrianism&oldid=8621174
Nightkey (talk) 16:48, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Economicexpert 

message: * Explain jargon like dhimmi, kafir, Yazdezard (in Persecutions in Iran) etc with a short summary. Provide context
* Expand lead and make paras in it. Put dates in the lead.
* Persecution should be spelt with a small p, if not the first word in a sentence
* Read WP:OVERLINK: do not give the same links like Zoroastrian repeatedly and restrict links to relevant ones. Avoid links like library (irrelevant to topic). Links like jijza should be on first instance.
* Avoid wordiness: "Zoroastrian temples converted into mosques in such a manner could be found in Bukhara, as well as in and near Istakhr and other Iranian cities." -> Such converted temples were in Bukhara, as well as in and around Istakhr and other Iranian cities.--Redtigerxyz  Talk  16:11, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions 

message: Here are some sources that are in contradiction with what is currently present in the article and received no coverage in the article:
* Having effectively been recognized as dhimmis under the Rashidun Caliphs, on the terms of annual payment of the Jizya, Zoroastrians were sometimes left largely to themselves, but this practice varied from area to area. Due to their financial interests, the Ummayads generally discouraged the conversion of non-Arabs, as the dhimmis provided them with valuable revenues (Jizya).
Before the conquest, the Persians had been mainly Zoroastrian. The historian Al-Masudi, a Baghdad-born Arab, who wrote a comprehensive treatise on history and geography in about 956, records that after the conquest: E.J. Brill's first encyclopaedia of Islam 1913–1936 By M. Th. Houtsma Page 100
* According to Bernard Lewis, the decline of Zoroastrianism in Iran was that the Zoroastrian clerics had a close relation with the government in ancient Persia. Once this support was gone after the Arab invasion lead to their reduction in cultural and political role and eventually to the loss of number of followers. Bernard Lewis, Jews of Islam, p. 17
* According to Amoretti in Cambridge History of Islam, the conquestors brought with them a new religion and a new language, but they did not use force to spread it. While giving freedom of choice, however, the conquestors designated privileges for those who converted.The Cambridge History of Iran Volume4 The Period from the Arab Invasion to the Saljuqs, p. 483
*According to Seyyed Hossein Nasr, the emergence of several Iranian Muslim scholars, represents willful change rather than social force as one cannot expect creative cooperation coming out of forceful conversion. Seyyed Hossein Nasr, The Cambridge History of Iran, p. 464
* According to Homa Katouzian, the occupation of Iran did not automatically lead to conversion. That is because as he argues, conversion was optional and unlike conquest which was rather quick, the conversion took two and a half centuries. Katouzian believes that the Arab conquestors prefered receiving taxes than seeing new converts (who were exempt from those taxes).Homa Katouzian, The Persians: Ancient, Mediaeval and Modern Iran, p. 66 
""According to Amoretti in Cambridge History of Islam, the conquestors brought with them a new religion and a new language, but they did not use force to spread it. While giving freedom of choice, however, the conquestors designated privileges for those who converted.[3]"". Now THAT is funny! The Muslims didnt use force to spread Islam, yet they INVADED Persia [and every country between Mecca and France, and Mecca and India in 60 years via warmongering] and they placed Islam as #1 wherever they went. If you wernt Muslim you were forced to pay special taxes and you are/were blocked from many upper tier positions in politics and in positions of power in general. The latter equates to oppression and it also is a subversive way to achieve converts. Muslims also converted fire temples into Mosques, there are enough sourced stories to show most were not peaceful conversions of the temples but forced. 107.222.205.242 (talk)
I think there's enough evidence here to support a prima facie case that Muslims may not have persecuted Zoroastrians. Seyyed Hossein Nasr and Homa Katouzian are Muslims so I can see why you might not accept their testimony, even though Nasr is a truly eminent scholar, but what about Lewis and Amoretti? Those are not Muslims and they challenge the narrative of Muslims massacring Zoroastrians. Wikipedia needs to do a better job of addressing issues related to Islam with fairness and openness to alternative views. Ibnsina786 (talk) 01:26, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: thanks for those information. I don't know the subject, I am just visiting this article today from one of its translation and it looks deeply misleading, I don't understand it can have been a good article. In the paragraph 'Persecution' above I linked the reddit discussion about this question that is in agreement with what you wrote, and looks much more balanced than this article. The introduction deserves a rewrite and the title should be changed. -- UtaUtaNapishtim (talk) 21:18, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: So, let's ignore all the other sources and assume that the Zoroastrians were treated well? Wrong. I don't think the title should be changed, since it was persecution indeed. --HistoryofIran (talk) 21:52, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV tag for Arab invasion section 

message: There was a NY times review mentioning a verse from Shahnama about Muslims..
But such a verse does not exist from the book that is reviewed: .  Unfortunately from the Wikipedia article, wrong information has entered other books..what a shame.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.18.145.11 (talk) 03:54, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Wrong, as seen here , numerous sources attribute that exact saying to Shahnameh. --Kansas Bear (talk) 04:42, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: all those books unfortunately got it either from this article or the ny times review...I would check the dates on those books relative to when the verse was first mentioned here or in ny times article  That verse is not in any shahnama.. Persian or English... No doubt there was persecutions of Zoroastrianss but Ferdowsi himself was a Muslim and I have read the shahnameh numerous times.. .perhaps the best bet is to ask a shahnameh expert for further verifiability--108.18.145.11 (talk) 05:20, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, at a second glance, the sentence and quote have nothing to do with Persecution of Zoroastrianism! So technically, we could remove it on those grounds. --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:40, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: wrong attribution to Ferdowsi

message: How can this be a considered a good article if there is a POV tag in it? 70.187.179.139 (talk) 05:07, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  How can this be a good article? 

message: Interested volunteers can add details about the Chinese persecution of Zoroastrian beginning during the Tang dynasty under Emperor Wuzong until its eventual disappearance in the 12th century.
* https://arshtad.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/china.pdf
109.63.112.41 (talk) 00:58, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestion

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Persecution of Zoroastrians. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090414093548/http://www.gatha.org:80/english/articles/000258.html to http://www.gatha.org/english/articles/000258.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:21, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: You are restoring unreliable sources and unsourced text. Particularly this one http://zoreled.org/historyzorislamiciran.aspx. The source is actually a dead link. I wonder if you even cared to check the sources before taking your actions. Not only that you claim it has been here for quite a time. This is no valid defense. It could have been here simply because no one noticed and I don't think just because it had been here for a time makes it automatically reliable, not according tp the rules I read on Wikipedia. And from another link of the website it seems to biased spreadimg its propaganda rather than actual history and unscholarly that doesn't base itself on any primary or secondary sources. Such websites are usually never even used in historical articles. We need schokarly sources.
Not only that you restored another unreliable source http://www.fouman.com/history/Iranian_History_0714.htm. I already proved that this source gave incorrect information regarding the raid. It is not WP:RS. I replaced it with this reliable source https://books.google.com/books?id=VG36ym3H3CQC&pg=PA22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjziO_w2ZPMAhXTGo4KHTWuDuIQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&f=false. The source is scholarly and reliable and cites primary and other secondary sources. Yet you have removed the reliable source. This is disruptive editing, adding unreliable sources and removing perfectly reliable ones. You also said that "I don't care what you think". This is a perfect indication that you might be here just to edit as per what you think is correct, not improving Wikipedia. MystroTheFreak (talk) 18:23, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: ^ Though the WP:SPA "user" above has already received a warning for WP:WAR, I've also issued a warning for outright socking as he's using two IP's apart from this account (IP 124.253.255.217 - IP 124.253.253.94) to cause the same disruption here on this article. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:49, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits by [[User:The History of Iran]] 

message: According to the current version of the article, in the Islamic Republic of Iran (1979-Present): "Members of religious minorities are, by law and practice, barred from being elected to a representative body (except to the seats in the Majles reserved for minorities, as provided for in the Constitution) and from holding senior government or military positions."
However, there's Sepanta Niknam, "an Iranian politician who serves as a councillor in Yazd since 2013".
So is such a law/practice still in place? A455bcd9 (talk) 12:48, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, he is an exception for some reason. --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:44, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: This should not be a GA. The line is practically correct but not technically. TrangaBellam (talk) 14:25, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Persecution in modern day Iran