Talk:Persian Gulf/Archive 4

message: In 1977, the third UN Conference on the Standardization of Geographical Names (UNCSGN) adopted resolution III/20  entitled "Names of Features beyond a Single Sovereignty". The resolution recommended: 
  "when countries sharing a given geographical feature do not agree on a common name, it should be a general rule of 
  cartography that the name used by each of the countries concerned will be accepted. A policy of accepting only one or some 
   of such names while excluding the rest would be inconsistent as well as inexpedient in practice."
Why can't we be direct and clear about this and just admit its not just a naming dispute. The Iranians want to show to the world that this gulf is under their control; one way of doing that is calling it Persian Gulf. I just hope non-Iranians editors will join in this discussion, since they are the ONLY key to a NPOV article regarding this dispute. CheersJidan 02:32, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the "evil Iranians and Zionists" are to blame.Azerbaijani 02:44, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Where is the relavent text with the map.  Note I already brought one form of deceit from the arabian Gulf website.  Again Meractor did not write Sinus Arabicus in his map.  Now you are persuming Hondius did based on a link.  But I have the text scanner by Hondius from the same alleged source here .  Note it is clearly called Persian Bay.  Every single atlas that has been published has a relevant text.  Can you guys show any text whatsoever that has mentioned Arabian Gulf.  Note if Hondius calls it Persian Bay in his text then either Sinus Arabic is forgery or a mistake or refers to the Shatt al-Arab, or Arabian Sea or even Red Sea (but misplaced due to printing) or even the name of another river.  As per the name, once you guys calling Plaestine by Israel  then we can settle this issue as well.  Do a google search for sinus Arabicus and you will not see one textual evidence referring to Persian Gulf. Also the UN has officially recognized it as Persian Gulf as that is what it uses in all of its documents. And relavent reliables books have said the Arabs have adopted the name Arabian Gulf as political stance, not historic stance as there is no support historically in any Arabic text for such a name.  And so far there has not been brought one textual evidence with any of these so called maps whose authenticity is disputed.  I am waiting for actual textual evidence that goes along with any of these maps.  Note also: [Note also .  The word used here is also sea (sein).  That is why the map is not Arabian Gulf and as all texts say, Arabian Gulf is forgery of 1950-1960 Arab nationalism.  From the day of Prophet Muhammad til the era of ultra-racist arab nationalism, not a single arab has called the Persian Gulf as Arabian Gulf.  --alidoostzadeh 02:48, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  This is supposedly Hondius's map but he refers to the Persian Gulf as Persian Bay.  Hondius's atlas has full textual context.  So far you have failed to bring one evidence that any of these maps (wether forgery or not) are not referring to Arabian Sea or Shatt ol Arab or some other parts of the body.  Without any textual evidence, there is nothing to talk about since we have already brou
ght several books that say the name change was a product of the last century.  And there is no Arabic sources that has mentioned it as Arabian Gulf prior to the last century neither.  Here is a good run down of Arabic sources on the issue: . --alidoostzadeh 04:10, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its written black in white over the whole disputed water body Arabicus Sinus, where sinus is latin for gulf or bay. I have found academic websites containing dozens of antique maps naming this water body arabian gulf by different authors.I will also check the library for antique maps. I will collect all these maps and post them in this article and in the naming dispute article. I will also translate articles in arabic written by professors, which talk about the historical facts of calling this gulf the arabian gulf, since in english there isn't any. Then I am going to open an RfC and arbitration to pull neutral users to this. I just don't have  the time right now, but I will later. The removing of those maps from the article is the trigger... Jidan 02:06, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It doesn't matter how many maps you put.  I have the text from Hondius with the map, which calls the Persian Gulf as Persian Bay.  There is also enough academic reference to show the name change was a product of the last century.  None of the recent maps brought so far have provided any textual evidence and sinus in lain means sea, as well canal.  So it could easily show the Arabian Sea which is connected to the Persian Gulf.  Again note Hondius's text whose map you have displayed above. Note the page numbers as well. In the text it is persian Bay. Mercator has called the sinus Arabicus as red sea as shown in the other maps.  So whereas you can bring the map by Hondius, in the text he calls it Persian Bay and that settles the issue and not your interpretation of the map.  Thus Sinus Arabicus has no textual backing.  So until you can provide one text, none of these maps can help your cause as they can reference Arabian Sea, Shatt ol Arab, Red Sea, be a mistake/forgery and etc.  And indeed the text from Hondius where the above map is taken shows that Hondius clearly calls the Persian Gulf as Persian Bay.  --alidoostzadeh 02:17, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  And note I was right, check out this link: need for subterfuge. There were number ciphers, symbols described, not as a written description, but in the translation of the word for the symbol. The cartographers had a more difficult time. They had to make an extremely accurate map, so that those fleeing could escape safely, but they could not give the same information to those persecuting them.  On this particular map of Claudius Ptolemy, the land called Arabia Felix was very visible with a small cordiform projection inserted near the Oman Peninsula. But as usual, the Red Sea area, so faithfully colored in so many earlier maps,4 (here in the area where the red and white islands are located) was now in a new location, south of the Arabian Sea or Sinus Arabicus..  So as the Hondius map with the text shows, the text clearly refers to the Persian Gulf as Persian Bay.  Sinus Arabicus is the Arabian Sea and sometimes it is referred to as the red sea.  --alidoostzadeh 03:29, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Arab nationalists have started using fake maps such as those brought forward by Jidan, however these do not refer to any Gulf by the name they try to use it as. I am rather glad that no neutral Academic would accept such disgraceful attempt to change history --Rayis 12:08, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:   Some could be fake, but the fact is that none of them reference the Persian Gulf.  They either reference Arabian Sea, Shatt ol Arab or the river following from Arabia to the Persian Gulf.  That is why there is no textual evidence whereas all of the evidences require textual evidence. .  1) there has been brought already ample number of western texts which show the name change was from the last century in Arab countries.  2) there is not even one evidence even from Arab sources which calls it Arabian Gulf from the last century.  3) There are maps that have connected the Gulf of Oman to the Persian sea and use one name for both.  In the end we saw how Arab nationalists feel about Iranians when genocidal Saddam breathed his last words of hatred against Iranians.  --alidoostzadeh 02:23, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

text:  First of all, don't label other editors, that's a violation of WP:NPA and WP:AGF. The issue of the map was alerady addressed and you're avoiding the point that Hondius clearly uses Persian Sea or Persian Gulf throughout the same book that this map is supposdly coming from. That just doesn't make any sense, and directly puts into question the authenticity of this map. As pointed out already, there is no textual evidence here, whereas all of the evidences require textual evidence.  --Mardavich 02:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

text:  Thanks Mardavich.  If I were Jidan I would stop labeling.  Acutally it is he that is distorting historical facts. I already said look at the textual evidence besides the map.  The map was already there and I thought Jidan would actually understand that the map is from the text.  Thus it is Jidan who is actually doing the distortion by not providing the users with the relavent text and only providing the map.  The text does not support the conclusion that Jidan is trying to derive from the map.  That is the pan-arabistic nationalistic manipulation of historic fact where they do not mention the text.  There is no Arabian Gulf in the text.  Sinus Arabicus could be a river from Qatif area, Arabian sea, Shatt ol Arab or anything else.  But it isn't the Persian Gulf since the text clearly has referred to it as the Persian Bay and that is the end of the story.  And that is what that counts since the text clarifies it.   Furthermore we have enough evidence from main stream Western sources that the distortion was a recent phenomenon.  Besides that, there is not a single Arab source as well. --alidoostzadeh 03:05, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

text: "Persian bay" is first mentioned on line 10th of page 855. --Mardavich 05:41, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Nope I didn't scan the page and also the map goes with the textual evidence thus since the map was available, the owner of that site probably decites to put the textual evidence up and focus on that aspect.   I think the actual forgery is done by those who do not bring the textual evidence like the mentioned site you named.  As per that site (Arabian Gulf) that you brought:  1)If you go under collection and then view a map and then click on map index. Click on the one from 1740(Jacques Nicholas Bellin) Then do a zoom. On the legend on the bottom left corner of the image it clearly says on the text Et Golfe de Perse. So this map is out of the picture.  And just these two examples Hondius (the site does not mention that the texts say Persian Bay) and this 1740 map is enough to discredit the site.  Indeed the site lacks a single textual evidence.  This is actually just pure forgery since all these maps come with texts like the Hondius text.  So the relavent textual evidence is the most important.  Here are two quotes of Hondius: The kingdome of Persia is situtate between the Turkish empite, the Tartarians, the Zaghatheans, the Kingdom of cambala, and the between the Hircarnian or Caspian sea, and the Persian Bay(pg 855). Babylon is situate betweene the Persian bay and Mesopotamia, and on the right and left it is enclosed with the deserts of Susia and Arabia,...(pg 858).  Note there are maps that mention the Oman sea as Persian Sea and some maps can bring Arabian sea to the Persian Gulf.  Note also Zereshk has brought Mercator's original map (Hondius just published Mercator's map) where  Mercator calls it Persian Gulf.  It is kind of illogical to think Hondius thought of anything else, or else he would not mention it as Persian Bay explicity in his text. Note the evidence I brought also from map site that says: But as usual, the Red Sea area, so faithfully colored in so many earlier maps,4 (here in the area where the red and white islands are located) was now in a new location, south of the Arabian Sea or Sinus Arabicus.’’   --alidoostzadeh 06:08, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Sorry but telling people to ask their professors is not the correct way of verifying information on Wikipedia. The maps on that website are fake I am afraid. --Rayis 22:31, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

text:  You are wrong and now you are starting to ASSUME  as you have not seen the Latin and are making wild conjectures.  The Latin if it exists does not say Sinus Arabicus since the Old English is from 1642 and is word by word translation of Hondius.  Because the Hondius Atlas book is scanned from the original English from a website that has old atlas and it is in Old English.  I have the cover page as well.  That is why as you can see it is in Old English.  The problem you can not fathom is that the Western sources have explicity said the name was recent falsification.  You can not find Arabic source either..  I already discredited the Arabian Gulf site by these two examples.  One example clearly calls it Golfe De Persian and yet the owner claims it as Arabian Gulf.  Also Hondius uses Persian Bay.  Also the maps have watermark.  And finally the owner does not provide one line of textual evidence with any of his maps besides being discredited by my two examples.   Right now you lack textual evidence and if you are making claims in Latin, then bring it forth.  Note One of the Maps say Gulf of El Qatif to Sinus Arabian (Arabian Sea) very clearly from that same site.(Peter van den Keere 1609).  Thus Sinus Arabicus is the Arabian Sea.  I already posses enough Western and Arabian source that neutral that mention the name change took place in the Arabian countries in the last century.  Without even a single textual evidence there is really nothing t argue against the sources.  Whereas I just brought another western source that calls the Sinus Arabicus as Arabian Sea.  Also Hondius uses Mercator's Map which we already have seen (thanks to Zereshk).  And the Hondius text clearly says Persian Bay.  --alidoostzadeh 01:25, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not just a naming dispute 

message: Historical, Geographical and Legal Validity of the Name: PERSIAN GULF 
Geography, as the most ancient human knowledge is an applied science which has different
aspects. It studies the reciprocal relation of man and nature and provides the results to the
users in the form of documents in writing, books and maps.
The names of features and phenomena including natural or man made ones have been
considered by geographers for a long time, therefore similar features are distinguished by it.
The name of a feature can not be observed on the land like the feature itself. Thus, by
mentioning the case on maps, Atlases, and books, it will be protected during different eras as
a part of historical, cultural identity and saved as mans heritage.
For the same reason, any change, destruction, or alteration of the names registered in
historical deeds and maps is like the destruction of ancient works and is considered as an
improper action. Therefore, the names of geographical features profiting from a unique
historical identity, should not be utilized as political instruments in reaching a political, tribal,
and racial objective, or in any clash with national interests and other's values.
This paper provides a short study of the historical background of the name PERSIAN GULF
so that it might cast light on realities.
Persian Gulf's name in UN: http://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/profile/mideastr.pdf
http://pejman.azadi.googlepages.com/thepersiangulf&itsname —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.247.189.210 (talk) 05:41, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical, Geographical and Legal Validity of the Name: PERSIAN GULF  

message: Firstly, the name of the Persian Gulf is not "holy". There is nothing religious about it. Secondly, involving the issue of Iran's occupation of UAE islands or questioning the Palestinians' right to nationhood is designed to stir up nationalist sentiment. It has no place in this editorial issue.
The fact is that all the Arab states in the Gulf region refer to the Gulf as the Arabian Gulf, in both Arabic and English. That might hurt Iranian sensibilities. It may or may not be inaccurate. It may or may not be an act of Arab nationalism. The fact remains that some governments and peoples refer to it as the Arabian Gulf. This should be reflected in the article. I would not suggest renaming the article to Arabian Gulf, but simply pointing out the alternative name for the Gulf should be mentioned in the introductory paragraph.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 13:03, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Kind of agree. For example see Turkish coffee. Even though its name is by far Turkish coffee, alternate names in neighboring countries are also mentioned in the lead with a mention "depending on location". It would be simply academic to mention "(sometimes also referred to as the Arabian Gulf, depending on location)". Just my two cents :) Baristarim 11:11, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, this is not Turkish coffee. The name Arabian Gulf is already appropriately mentioned and discussed under the naming dispute section, undue weight should not be given to a name that's controversial, and not commonly used in English language or any other language outside of the Arab world. The issue was already discussed to death at Talk:Persian_Gulf#Protection. --Mardavich 11:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Response to anon 

message: I was viewing your chalenges, I'd say that no need to mention this is Persian Gulf.
Arbitrarily changing an internationally recognized name, is not only unprofessional but also a hostile act, directed at an entire nation/civilization, not to mention denying historical as well as international facts
Please consider that the Persian Gulf's name is the only registered name in UN .
No need to mention that it is not too hard to find the result of Persian gulf in Google just type " Persian Gulf".
I respect to your idea and I'd like to help you to find the only fact.
Thank you in advance for your kind consideration.91.98.8.54 08:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:   Persian Gulf does not need to any evidence, because it is clear that is Persian Gulf 

message: The Persian Gulf University is located in the coastal city of Bushehr.(Coast of the Persian Gulf) 
It is a state university under the supervision of the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology. The Persian Gulf University was established in 1991. It started its educational work as a "technical & engineering school" with the two majors of mechanical and civil engineering.
It was originally under the management of the Shiraz University. Later on, after opening new academic departments in 1994 and and 1995, it was turned into "Bushehr University". 
In 1996 Bushehr University was properly renamed "Persian Gulf University" because of its geographic location and closeness to the magnificent coasts of the Persian Gulf. 
Today,the Persian Gulf University (PGU) consists of five faculties offering undergraduate courses leading to Bachelor's degree (B.A. or B.S.) in 20 disciplines, postgraduate courses leading to Master’s of Science in five specialties, and also one undergraduate course leading to higher diploma. 
In line with the aforesaid regional, cultural and economic potentials, PGU is planning to open more fields of study leading to higher diploma, some 20 disciplines leading to B.A. or B.S.,13 specialties towards M.A. or M.S. and 4 specialties leading to PhD.
PGU's academic staff consists of almost 130 full-time members
whose responsibilities are to teach, engage in research and 
direct the courses of study for over 4000 students in both 
day and evening sessions during two semesters in each academic year. PGU's Administration is directed by the Chancellor Prof. H. Tajik and the four Vice-Chancellors for: Academic Affairs (Dr. Mehranpour), Research (Dr. Fiouz), Students and Cultural Affairs(Dr. Diyanat), and Administrative and Financial Affairs (Dr. Mussavi).
Chancellor's Office: Tel: +98-(0)771-4545187 Fax: +98-(0)771-4545188 
Address: Shahid Mahini Street, Bushehr 75168 IRAN-PERSIAN GULF
http://www.pgu.ac.ir/english/index.htm82.99.246.113 18:13, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Persian Gulf University (PGU)  

message: Dear User: Baristarim,
I'd like to say the Persian Gulf's name is the only registered name in UN.
So Arbitrarily changing an internationally recognized name, is not only unprofessional but also a hostile act, directed at an entire nation/civilization, not to mention denying historical as well as international facts.
For my reasons you can read these web sites:
http://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/profile/bahrain.pdf
http://www.un.org/depts/dhl/maplib/docs/escwa.pdf 
http://unstats.un.org/unsd/geoinfo/gegn23wp61.pdf
http://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/profile/iran.pdf 
http://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/profile/oman.pdf
http://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/english/htmain.htm
http://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/profile/mideastr.pdf
http://Pejman.Azadi.googlepages.com/Iran
And also about the Persian Gulf's name in Google search: 
I'd like to say if anyone type arabian gulf in google search he/her will be faced to the truth! ====> 
Arabian Gulf" does not exist in any part of the World.
"Persian Gulf" is an appropriate name for a gulf located in south of Iran, in Middle East.
Persian Culture is an ancient and historical one and nobody can deny it. Considering Persian Culture as ancient and historical culture is undeniable. So, never do replace the name of "Persian Gulf" with a new and improper title like "Arabian Gulf".'''
Thank you for taking the time.82.99.246.1 19:18, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Persian Gulf in UN documents and Google search. 

message: Persian Gulf is an International name and term, it has 
  within International legal validity, any another 
  local name is an Apocryphal name.'''
 United Nation is using only the Persian Gulf's name :
http://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/english/htmain.htm
http://unstats.un.org/unsd/geoinfo/gegn23wp61.pdf
And about Amazon Site:
 http://www.amazon.com/Persian-Gulf-Atlas-Historical-Maps/dp/9648403449
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLJ,GGLJ:2006-40,GGLJ:en&q=persian+gulf+in+amazon
Do you Want more?!!! Ok here!!!!
 Persian Gulf in NASA:
 http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view_rec.php?id=2363
 Persian Gulf in CNN: 
 http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2002/iraq/deployment.map/
 Persian Gulf in the White House:
 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html
 Persian Gulf in Canadian Ofiicial immigration site:
 http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/offices/notices/abu-dhabi.html
 Persian Gulf in Canadian Embassy in uae!:
 http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/abudhabi/menu08-en.asp
Still want more?!!! ok here!
 Persian Gulf in US Congress:
 http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/cstdy:@field(DOCID+bh0000)
 http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/bhtoc.html
 Persian Gulf EIA:
The Energy Information Administration (EIA), created by Congress in 1977, is a statistical agency of the U.S. Department of Energy. Our mission is to provide policy-independent data, forecasts, and analyses to promote sound policy making, efficient markets, and public understanding regarding energy and its interaction with the economy and the environment. 
http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/aboutEIA/aboutus.html
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/pgulf.html
 Persian Gulf in History:
 http://pejman.azadi.googlepages.com/Iran
 Please consider the Persian Gulf's name is using 
 in all of the world and if any another name is using 
 in local small arab countries, 
 it is Apocryphal name 
 
 Persian Gulf in The National Academies Press:
  http://www.nap.edu/catalog/9057.html
  Kind Regards,The Persian Gulf 08:55, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Persian Gulf's name and its wide usage in the official documents and governmental documents 

message: There must be a lot of money involved in this.  I am neither arab nor persian but from what I have researched, "Arabian Gulf" is not an alternative but rather something that arab nations are investing huge sums of money to make alternative.    
There is a lot of money being wasted by these nations to try to change this name to "Arabian Gulf" to satisfy their nationalistic thirst.
:These Arabs have sucked a lot of things from Persian culture to their name and this is one of the few last things that is left. And all they left is Islam. And they will try anything to destroy the rest of this old and prestigious culture. --Arad 02:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Need for "Arabian Gulf" 

message: NO dispute, this is Persian Gulf. If tomorrow, me and 1000 (or even, let's say 100 million) people from my city started calling US the Junk Food Nation, does that make Junk Food Nation and alternative for US? US will remain US for ever and Persian Gulf is forever Persian. --Arad 02:47, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  There is no dispute, THIS IS PERSIAN GULF 

message: All the people in the world even arabs know that the southern sea of the great land of Persia (IRAN) is Named and known by Persian Gulf. It's all because of western policies to stimulate arab people to think that Persian Gulf is arabian gulf. They are in a huge mistake. Because no one can change or deny history.Hamidreza tk
--Hmrtk 20:37, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Persian Gulf Has been always Persian Gulf in the whole history. 

message: According to the research by Dr. Farhang Mehr, Mohammad the prophet of Islam called the Persian Gulf "Bahre Farsi" (Persian Sea). 
Furthermore:
This was the term used during the time of the prophet Mohammad and the four Right Guided Caliphs, which constitutes a "Sunna". Given the Sunna, one may question the permissibility of any change in the name of the "Persian Gulf" as it would constitute an innovation or Bed'a which is Hara'm. 
--Rayis 14:51, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interesting addition 

message: Persian Gulf in Arabic is الخليج الفارسي al-khalīj al-fārisi NOT الخليج العربي al-khalīj al-ārbī which translates as Arabian Gulf.Azerbaijani 18:33, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: also check here: .  --alidoostzadeh 22:27, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi all, regarding this gulf, it is indeed called الخليج العربي (The Arabic Gulf) in Arabic. The debate we are trying to have here is not really about who has 'control' over it, but the naming in the Arabic language. Indeed, الخليج العربي is what it is called and has been called for a long time. As for the actual gulf itself, it isn't controlled or owned by one of the two sides. And for some of the editors here who are vehemently defending the naming الخليج الفارسي without proper sources, or even proper justification, please stop. There is no reason to start a lame edit war over something like this, the title of the article should follow what it is commonly referred to in English, since this is English wikipedia, but whether you like it or not, the fact is that in Arabic it is called 'The Arabic Gulf'. Thanks. Asabbagh 00:16, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi.  If you mean by long time 50 years ago then that is not long time.  In Arabic before 50 years ago it has been الفارسی and you would not find العربی.  Check here if you do not believe me: .  Thus we are going by the historical name in Arabic texts.  The modern name is Arabic text is mentioned later on in the article.  --alidoostzadeh 00:19, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, there is not a single Arabic text that has called it Arabian Gulf before the era of modern nationalism.  Again since you read Arabic read this article .  Note the wiki policy: .  The fact is in all historical Arabic texts it has never been called any other name.  Arabic language does not necessarily mean what Arab countries do or do not.  This is English wikipedia and we follow what historical texts have said about the issue.  The name is Arabic in the first line has to do with the common nae Persian Gulf which is mentioned in historical Arabic texts before the era of rabid nationalism in Arab countries.  Thus it is just another way of writing Persian Gulf per the historical Arabic texts (Ibn Batuba, Ibn hawqal..) I just mentioned.  --alidoostzadeh 00:25, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Actually the wikipedia policy is to not give undue weight to minority POV.  Persian Gulf is the majority POV. I have already explained that in classical Arabic it is also Khalij Farsi.   So the minority POV (in the western world and this is english wikipedia) should not be given the same weight.  The reason that Iranians get upset over this issue is simple.  From the Hadeeths of the Prophet Muhammad till 50 years in  Arabic texts it has been Bahr-e-Fars, Khalij-e-Farsi.. but all of the sudden Nasser/Saddam.. come and change it to Khalij 'Arabi in Arabic speaking countries.  The reason is simple.  Two groups of people Arab countries do not like are Persians and Jews.  Persians/Iranians despite being Muslims are disliked in Arab countries and that is why Nasser/Saddam changed the historical name.  I am wondering if you would like it if someone calledSaudia Arabia as America or Persia?  Personally I find this political manipulation racist as calling Saudia Arabia as Persia.  There is also an Arabian sea in the Indian ocean and an Arabian Gulf in western literature used for the Red Sea.  Thus the Arabic countries should fix their mistake with this regard and not try to propogate it.  Note the historical revisionism with this regard. [].  Interestingly enough they say Israel should be called فلسطین and Israel is a new name.  Assuming that to be the case (and I am no expert on that issue), then why the double standard?  Anyways the Arabic in the first line has to do with the common name Persian Gulf in Arabic spelling and we are mentioning it based on historical text[].  Later on in the article it has been explained that Arab countries call it now Arabian Gulf but the wiki policy is to give the common and historical name prominence []   --alidoostzadeh 00:51, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, do not give undue weight to minority POV. I assume that the majority of English sources refer to the gulf as 'Persian Gulf', and that's why the article is titled as such. However, the vast majority of Arabs call it 'Arabian Gulf', and that's why the Arabic name should be shown as such. Writing it as الخليج الفارسي is giving undue weight to minority POV. Pretty much all the analogies you made are false, especially the Israel/Palestine example, since the modern state of Israel is a country established on another country's land, and in no way is this similar to this gulf, which isn't really occupied by anyone. Thanks. Asabbagh 01:04, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes we have mentioned that Arabs called it Arabian Gulf later on.  But the major name comes first.  Writing it الخلیج الفارسی is just how Persian Gulf is pronounced in classical Arabic.  Thus that needs to be mentioned as well.  It does not negate the fact that Arab countries call it Arabian Gulf which is discussed later in the article as a minority POV can not be presented on the first line.  But if there is confusion we can simply remove the Arabic in the first line.   Nevertheless we have mentioned that Arab countries call it Arabian Gulf later in the article.  Unlike the Arabian Gulf which has never been found in any Arabian text..the name Israel is mentioned by Jews .  But I  was trying to understand why Arab countries change names as it suits their political needs and then protest at the same time.  Anyways I think the issue is resolved if we remove the Arabic from the first sentence or leave it as is since it is based on classical arabic texts.  --alidoostzadeh 01:20, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Actually the article covers all aspects of Persian Gulf including its history.  The major name in Arabic historically has been Persian Gulf until 50 years ago.  The current name of Arabian Gulf is also minority viewpoint in English.  We need to mention that classical Arabic sources have not called it الخلیج العربی.  They have used terms like بحر الفارسی و الخلیج فارسی .. So that is why the classical Arabic sources which are in harmony with western sources and Persian sources are mentioned.  We can perhaps under the Arabic of the first line mention classical sources as a reference.  Since the arabian gulf name is a minority point of view, (mainly shared mainly by arab countries and not the rest of the world) we need to either remove it or just mention in paranthesis that classical arabic sources..and for the modern name in Arabic countries see below.  --alidoostzadeh 02:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Been discussed a million times before. Persian Gulf is Persian Gulf, Israel is Israel, no matter how many people call it differently.  --Rayis 10:39, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Rayis, it appears that you have not read any of my comments. Asabbagh 11:49, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Aziz

message: Dear all,
Wikipedia is not a battleground!! I suggest to add all names, used to describe this sea, in Arabic language. As far as I know, these are: الخليج العربي، الخليج الفارسي، خليج القطيف all together as it has been indicated through many different old maps and geographical references. Editors interested in this page are asked to give other suggestions. One-sided POV is refused in Wikipedia. I ask everyone to re-read the Five Pillars and remember that Wikpedia has a neutral point of view. Any disput should go through discussion, and then through this process but not deleting and re-deleting. 
This page is going to be under monitor. Many editors and adminstrators get informed about this dispute and they are going to watch editing in this page and realted pages. Users are kindly asked to keep cool head when discussing in this talk page and follow Wikipedia:List of policies. Ralhazzaa 14:53, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope you need to discuss your changed.  الخلیج العربی و خلیج القطیف are minority POV's.  They can not be added and given the same weight and prominence as the common name.  You can those other names later on the page.  Read the guidelines about undue weight from wikipedia.[[weight].   --alidoostzadeh 14:55, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  hold on buddy.. I am not begging you! This is Wikipedia but not an elementary school in Tehran! Your discussion has deep ideological & political background and far away from Five Pillars. If you go back and re-read the discussion and evalute the language used by majority of users (including you!) you will find it biased, which is big violation for Wikipedia's polices. If you, yourself, decided to consider a names used by 300 million Arabic speaker, an official language of the UN, a historical name mentioned before Romans (as you can see in info u deleted!) as a minority POV and Undue weight, then we should apply your standard and ask your people to stop calling your country as Iran. This is a minority POV term as indicated here cannot change a historical fact!! French people should apply your "standard of weighing" and stop using the term "La Manche" as it is a minority POV!! Also, your "standard of weighing" should be applied on banning the use of "Great Britain" anywhere.. it is just a minority POV.. huh? Please have a cool head and try to understand that other people has the right to be correct but not in your way. Please consider a good level and good will through discussion here. Others may have a truth different from yours! Ralhazzaa 04:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the evidence page[].  Lets see that historical name used before Romans!  Note Strabo clearly refers to it as Persian Gulf.  And there does not exist a single textual evidence for Arabian Gulf.  It is good that you read that refutation before you place older edition of maps from the same books who were corrected and correctly used Persian Gulf in their text as well other maps of the older edition.  Note in the English speaking world, your POV is a minority.  Specially by the directive of the official US national geographic board your POV is minority in the largest English speaking country.  The UN English site also clearly says Persian Gulf.    As per your personal attack it has been reported to the admin.  --alidoostzadeh 05:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey alidoostzadeh, just to let you know, this link has been posted a large number of times on this very page, so really I don't understand why you have to keep posting it again. You still, at the same time, continue to miss the point, which is that it doesn't matter what the common name in English is, the Arabic translation should be reported as the common name in Arabic, and not a translation of the common name in English. So, please, don't respond to this by saying something like ".. but historically it was not that..", because in doing so you are throwing the whole debate out of the window. Thanks. Asabbagh 07:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If there is a name used by an old Roman historian (Pliny the Younger, 2000 years ago) but not satisfying you, this is not my problem! Greeks called it as Persian Gulf, so ok! This means that there is a name conflict with 2 names, simply. This shouldn't be a serious problem and could be found everywhere when two nations using different languages are sharing a territory as the British used to call "The British Channel" while Frenches saying "La Manche", this will never means that one is fake and other is completely true. May I remind you that we are talking about the "Arabic" name of this sea, not the English or the Persian?!! You keep translating it according to your believing and keep ignoring the true real name in Arabic language. You may find classical literature "written" in Arabic -thus, biased- (mayby by a persian, like al-istakhri) and use it as a reference, while keep ignoring the real, ancient & contemporary name(s) and live translation from English to Arabic. If you still not sure, leave this job to native Arabs, and I don't think you are native Arab to use this right. Also, you shouldn't refute the validity and credibility of ancient maps and books by saying "corrected". This may make you loose neutrality by falsifying human heritage for geopolitical-ethnic purposes. Maps & ancient books kept in museums since generations and used as sources for education and writing the history, besides UN documents in official language, shouldn't be claimed as "fake"! No one in the civilized world will accept this at all... corrected! huh.. We are mature buddy!! Ralhazzaa 07:17, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey alidoostzadeh! The link you are posting and re-using extesively is Iranian, but just written in English! It is not accepted at all as a neutral reference. Do you want me to create a website in English saying there is no sun in the solar system then rely on it in wirting "Our Sunless Solar System" in Wikipedia? Please show more credibility in using references, and stop saying "fake" and "corrected map/book". This is not good at all ;) Ralhazzaa 07:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Don't you think there is a big gap between Translation and Transliteration? If we should accept your idea, sir, so we should delete the word "La Manche" from the English page of the English Channel and replace it with "Canal Anglais" (nice tune)! or delete the Spanish name of Falkland Islands, Islas Malvinas, from its English page on Wikipedia, or stop using the term Taiwan as it is formally Republic of China and it is not accepted by ROC to mention them as just Taiwan!! right sir? If we are going to include the Arabic name for this sea, then it is الخليج العربي (literaly: Al-Khaleij Al-Arabi). Saying الخليج الفارسي (Al-Khaleij Al-Farsi) in Arabic is really drive me fall of laughing. Why no Algerian is shouting asking the English speaking people to stop saying Algeria and use Aljaza'er? Keep cool and consider live translation instead of machine transliteration, like Algerians ;) I hope no Iranian, in the future, will go to the Arabic page of Tehran and urge to replace the ط with ت as the first letter in the name Ralhazzaa 10:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Pliny also uses Persian Gulf for Persian Gulf and uses Arabian Gulf for the red sea.  As per the Arabic name.. it can be removed from the begining or used in its true historical Arabic context..  --alidoostzadeh 02:16, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding all available names in Arabic 

message: As the "Arabian" Gulf name does exist and is mentioned in the article, it should receive mention in the lead.  I'd suggest re-adding the older form with a slight modification: "also known as the Arabian Gulf in Arab countries http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9106298/Persian-Gulf, though this alternate name is a subject of dispute (source)."
Sound fair? I mean, it is just adhering to WP:LEAD anyway, but still, what do you all think of this compromise? Also feel free to  suggest better wording as something seems awkward about it right now.  The Behnam 06:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You came here as part of your stalking my edits, like your edit on Koryun. But read the talk page again, your suggestion is nothing new, and there is a clear consensus against it. ArmenianJoe 07:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:LEAD]] 

message: Someone might want to cleanup the talk page: it really looks ugly and confusing with broken threads, sixty section headings and badly formatted posts. Archiving might be a good place to start :) Baristarim 05:35, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The talk page