Talk:Kurds/Archive 5

message: The statement regarding the killing of Zoroaster by Astyages, king of the Medes, is factually incorrect for three reasons. First, most Avesta and Iranian studies scholars, based upon language and geographic descriptions in the Avesta, place the time of the prophet Zoroaster to approx 3600 years in the region of Bactria/Balkh (Afghanistan/Uzbekistan). This time and place is: approx 1000 years before the time of Astyages and outside the geographic realm of the Medes. Second, the prophet Zoroaster was not killed by anyone, he died peacefully as an old man after accomplishing his task of converting the Iranians and Turanians to Zoroastrianism. Third, the mythological villain known as Azhi Dahak, from Shahname and the Avesta, was a myth even during the time of the prophet Zoroaster. So, if Zoroaster is dated to at least 1000 years before the Median king Astyages, and Azhi Dahak was a myth at the time of Zoroaster, then Azhi Dahak and Astyages can not have been the same historical figure. Also, Azhi Dahak is considered a villain in Kurdish and Persian mythology. The hero, Fereydoon, fought against Azhi Dahak, and according to Kurdish myth, Fereydoon is the father of the Kurdish people. As a final note, the Medes were Zoroastrians. The Medes also propagated the myth, although factually incorrect, that Zoroaster was born in Media and a Mede. So, it wouldn't make sense for the Medes to kill their own prophet. I think this just goes to the point that many Kurdish nationalist, and others, are trying desperately to distance themselves from anything and everything Iranic, and in the process are creating myths that cannot stand academic scruitny. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.4.210.29 (talk • contribs) 23:22, 22 February 2006
:The article is protected now. You can go ahead and correct the it when it's unprotected (or I'll do it if you're not around). AucamanTalk 01:38, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see you've taken the paragraph out. It wasn't such a bad idea. AucamanTalk 02:49, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was obviously factually incorrect. --68.4.210.29 02:57, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Yazidism and the killing of Zoroaster

message: The issue of whether the Kurds should be labeled “Iranian people” or not, since they speak an Iranian language, has been discussed to death! Some editors are really against mentioning it in the first paragraph and that is fine but the language issue should be mentioned in the second paragraph instead the article goes right into political stuff which I don’t think belongs here. Whether or not there should be an independent Kurdish state is not the first thing to mention while defining Kurdish people. We should talk about the race and language and their geographic location and then about politics. 
The second paragraph should be moved farther down the page and the third and fourth paragraph should instead become second and third respectively. 
It should look like this:
The Kurds are an ethnic group inhabiting northern and northeastern Mesopotamia, which includes parts of Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Turkey (a region sometimes referred to as Kurdistan). Smaller communities can also be found in Lebanon, Armenia, and Azarbaijan (Kalbajar and Lachin, to the west of Nagorno Karabakh).
Ranging probably from 25 to 30 million people, Kurds speak the mostly mutually-intelligible dialects of the Kurdish language, which is an Indo-European languange of the Iranian branch.
According to some sources, they are ethnically close to Iranians. Modern Kurds are commonly identified with the ancient Kingdom of Corduene inhabited by the Carduchi''''
This should make everybody happy! It does not label Kurds as Iranian but it does mention that their language is of the Iranian branch in the beginning of the article.  
Gol 21:13, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are several things which are problematic here. First, most of Iranian Kurdistan is not part of Mesopotamia, as far as I know. Second, ethnicity should better not be mentioned. The current form serves to distant them from Iranians rather than show a relation. Close to Iranians means they are themselves not Iranian, which is not proven, and most probably false. Some implies not many which again is wrong. Commonly identified? Is it really so common? Shervink 21:25, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, the reference to Mesopotamia should probably be taken out. But I think it's also significant that Kurdistan is not a country and it should be mentioned here. AucamanTalk 23:57, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ya Aucaman, its funny you agree, because when ever I removed it you reverted it.Shervink be careful with Aucaman he is one of the most biased and sneaky editors. He talks compromise, but his actions are something else. 69.196.139.250 03:07, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Come on, man! Aucaman's trying to work out a compromise with you, but you're being very inflexible! Please don't insult people or you could be banned. --Khoikhoi 03:10, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How is the truth insulting. I was not insulting. Acuman only pretends to compromise when in reality he undermines. If you don't beleive be go read all the discussions then check all the articles he has contributed to and his edits. It took mt 2 days. I can say he has no credibilty with me. Even the Mesopotamia statement. When I edit it he reverts it. Now he agrees. That is only the tip of the sharks fin too. 69.196.139.250 03:56, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Whatever you perceive the truth to be, avoid from making personal attacks or some admin may block you. --Khoikhoi 04:00, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I reverted your edit because you didn't discuss it in the talk page and there was no edit summary. But unlike you, I'm flexible. I'm willing to go with the above compromise. It's really up to you. If you don't want to solve the dispute, the current protected version would stay. You like the current version better? Guess what, I'm not that excited to change it anyway. And you cannot dismiss a proposed change just because it's proposed by someone you don't like. What's wrong with my proposed version? AucamanTalk 06:25, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion 

message: Since the article is currently locked, please change either the infobox count or the one in the text... they give two different figures. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.181.63.245 (talk • contribs) 08:17, 26 February 2006  (UTC)
:: I do not really see a problem wit the two estimates. The main text says 25-30 million, while the box narrows it down to 27-28 million. These are both  in the same range of figures, and neither can be established as the final word on the matter. --Vindheim 12:00, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  How many are there? 

message: There is no question about this. Infact the leader of a pan-Iranist party called Mellat Iran, Mr. Forouhar was a Kurd! --Kash 13:32, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kurds are Iranian people 

message: I can't believe in this discussion...I'm a Turk who lived between Kurds for years,who has been bestfriends with two Kurdish guys for 15 years now.I'm living in Belgium but was born in Istanbul,we came here 16 years ago and have been living in the same street where Turks and Kurds live together.I remember the time when PKK was terrorising the eastern side of Turkey,they killed thousands and they killed and dragged away their own people too and everybody knows that,the ones in denial not of course.I remember our mothers were crying while watching TV,my mother and my friends' mothers..who are Kurds indeed,were crying for their people(Kurds and Turks both) who suffered this stupid war,crying for their country(Turkey).I just can't understand how blind you guys are.Can't you see that this all is a power game?!That Turks and Kurds have been living together for countless years!The terror that has been going on was a big sickness because a guy wanted to feel so powerfull.Mr.Ocalan indeed,similar to what Bush is doing to the countries he's secretly terrorising and what Bin Ladin tries.The times I've been to Turkey,evey summer, sometimes I stayed with Kurds,I ate their food and never ever sensed animosity.My grandparents are living in a district called Sisli in Istanbul with Armenians and Jews,eating their food,shopping in their shops,building their friendships with them for years.This is how real people do in their lives in Turkey,they don't fight.Kurds have the right to speak their languages as well as Jews and Armenians do.We all have been living in the same country for ages.I never doubt their kindness and thoughts for the Turkish Republic,because I know they call themselves Turks as well as they call themselves as what their original origin is.'Cos they are also Turks indeed,since thay are living in the same country for years.Turkey is a big coloured mosaic of languages and races.It will always stay as one,as "Turkiye Cumhuriyeti",with it's Turkish,Armenian,Jew and Kurdish public.There is NO animosity in the villages,NO animosity in the cities.Only among politicians and people seeking for power to conquer the world or a territory both Kurds and Turks.Real people just cry for that sickness...
Friendly regards to all of you,
M.Citak----Set 03:11, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes you are right Turks have been living with Kurds (and the other Iranian peoples) for a long time, but do not count the Ottoman days when Kurdish culture WAS NOT SUPPRESSED OR ATTACKED. The problems started when Turks started to try an eliminate Kurdish culture and wipe their identy. That is when these problems have started. You call the PKK terrorit, but so are the policies of the Turkish state and government. It is called state sponsored terrorism. Do you know how many Kurds left both Iraq and Turkey to live in Iran? Iran had the second most refugess in the whole world for many years from all over the region, Europe, the former USSR, and southern Asia. But we must all agree violance will never solve anything.  69.196.139.250 00:42, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  So so sad... 

message: Shouldn't Aramic be included in the section where it discusses the language of the Kurds? Most of the Jewish Kurds and Christian Kurds speak Aramic as a first language. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.235.9.155 (talk • contribs) 
:Very good point. I'll add it when the article is unprotected. AucamanTalk 03:04, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aramic 

message: This article refers to it as being banned in much of middle east.. can we have a reference to this? Thanks --Kash 00:34, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Teaching Kurdish 

message: It must be talked out until the problems are settled it is not neutral. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.196.139.250 (talk • contribs) 16:27, 11 March 2006  (UTC)
: Could you elaborate on the problems so that they can be addressed? What does "POC" mean? --Tony Sidaway 17:29, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: This Article has much POC and is not Neutral

message: Due to recent edit warring, I've protected this article for just a few hours so that everybody can cool off.  Please use this talk page to discuss any changes so that we can reach agreement on what to do with the article. --Tony Sidaway 17:29, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unprotected. --Tony Sidaway 21:15, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Brief cool-off

message: The history section of this article should be edited. I did it once but it was changed back to the original content. The way it is written people will assume that those early cultures and civilizations were Kurdish. The history of the area where the Kurds now live is NOT kurdish history. To claim otherwise would be the same as saying that the ancient Egyptians were Arabs!Dariush4444 22:49, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Misleading Propoganda

message: It is inconsistant and badly structured. It deviates from established facts which is a shame for presenting the rich heritage of Kurds to the wider world. It should be edited. 69.196.139.250 01:45, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would also like to add, like it or not, Kurds are an ethnic Iranian people and long and deep cutltural and historical ties with other Iranian peoples, such as the Persians. Political motives should not hide, attack, and rape this fact. I see user:Acuman has moved on to assert a NAzi connection to the name of Iran and the meaning of the Land of Aryans (the ancestors of the Kurds and Lors amongst others). I see user:Diyako attacking the definition of Iranian and trying to make it only mean language instead of ethno-lingustic and now working on changing the Iraq article. I also see them both talking to Pan-Turkists who try to attack Kurdistn, Iran, and Caucasia. This is very wrong and hurting the community and the scholarly issues. What are their motives? These are not perosnal attacks as they claim and try to have me and many others who speak the truth blocked or even barred. This is all based on fact and true observations of their editing and discussions. They try to pin editors who have challenged their wrong and misleading content. What they are pushing is at the expense of the community and the facts about Kurds, Azeris, Persians, and Iranian peoples as well as the whole Middle East. 69.196.139.250 01:54, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: This article is Very bad

message: How can one lone article of a sporadic genetic research undo all the cultural and historic ties 
of kurds as this essential element of Iranian history 
Iran as concept is built by all the varied ethnic groups who at different periods in history have 
taken up the leadership of this entity 
so just Corduene ... who were the Medes & sassanids then or even safavids ..
saying that modern kurds are commonly identified with the ancient Kingdom of Corduene inhabited by the Carduchi is false or a half truth as kurds (or if you are happy say the people inhabiting the mountains where kurdish is mostly spoken)are also identified with many past great Iranian kingdoms 
How can it be verified in Wiki sense of the word that so and so kingdom was genetically more 
similar to the current population of that area 
If Hamedan lets say at one point has had a jewish majority would you take it out of Iranian history and add it the History of Israel what if turkish kurdistan would have had a majority armenian population for most of its history...if what ties all is the language then its of the 
Iranian family and so you are my brother..if its the customs all I can say is ...a happy norouz or newroz to all kurdish brothers who are happy enough not to be touched by modern crusaders and propogandists  ...--Loosekarma 03:54, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Forsaken all  the rest ..Only Corduene?  

message: I put the tag because we cannot everyday start and continue this debate, I'm waiting for a mediation. I do not know since when the most Authorative Encyclopedias of the world Britannica, encyclopedia of Columbia and Encarta are ignored and replaced with unknown random links. Diyako Talk + 23:01, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dispute

message: The Kurds, who constitute approximately 7% of Iran's overall population, have resisted the Iranian government's efforts, both before and after the revolution of 1979, to assimilate them into the mainstream of national life and, along with their fellow Kurds in adjacent regions of Iraq and Turkey, have sought either regional autonomy or the outright establishment of an independent Kurdish state in the region.
This seems very POV to me, and also the link was incorrect. Removed it for now --Kash 23:47, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Britannica is Neutral and I updated the link , thanks for reminding. Diyako Talk + 00:08, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kurds in Iran