Talk:History of Azerbaijan/Archive 1

message: :Hi Guys,
I just landed here, as I was looking for the Golestan treaty. I am some how surprised by the tone of discussions.
I believe these discussions are fruitless. Facts are facts. Yes, as mentioned in one of the articles, the real name of the region that is called republic of Azerbaijan today is ARRAN.
It was named "Azerbaijan" by Soviet leaders for simple geo-strategic and geo-political reasons. And you know what? We see they have been successfull when we see this type of narrow-minded discussions.
The truth is that Azeri's are much closer to Iranians (yes, Iranians and not only persians) that most of them want to admit. Azeri's share most of their history with Iran, as Iranians share their history with them. Our cultures have the same roots. We even share the same religion (most of Azeris are Chiites like the majority of Iranians, whereas most of Turks are Sunnites). Iranian Crown Princes have been always prepared to rule in Tabriz.
Have you ever asked yourselves why Azeri language is considered as a Turkic language? I let you go back to your books and you will find out the reasons.
Azeris have been among the first popolutions who built and founded Iran and they have been heroical. Have you heard of Babak Khoramdin? He is an Iranian Hero and of Azeri descent. He was a guy you resisted till the last moment the Arab invasion of Iran. He was not fighting for Azerbaijan only. He was fighting for Iran, his land.
There are more Azeris in Iran than in the republic of Azerbaijan. And you know what, they are happy to be Iranians.
Also, as an Iranian, let me tell you (and all Iranians - Azeri or non-Azeri - would tell you the same), we consider you as our brothers and sisters. We consider you as our compatriots.
Cheers, Babak.--81.63.25.171 20:38, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: [No title]

message: Month-long edit wars are bad. I suggest Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Also please read m:The wrong version and Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars ever. Thanks - David Gerard 00:35, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Page protected

message: The "Azeri"s on this page are actually Anatolian Turks, advocating the separation of Azerbaijan from Iran. How do I know this??
Because I myself am an Azeri. But like millions of Azeris, I am also a proud Iranian. Iran in fact belongs to us. We helped defend Iran against the Iraqis. We helped defend Iran against The Ottomans. For God's sake we even ruled Iran. who were The Medians? Who were the Safavis? Who were The Qajaris? Who were the Pahlavis? Who is Ayatollah Khamenei? Ayatollah Khamenei IS an Azeri. Iran is ours. And I am not going to sit and be convinced to separate and move out of the land that is ours. The Azeris are in fact the remnants of The Medians. I claim this for a fact. We even have indigenous Turks in Fars. Besides, Iranians, unlike the Turks and brainwashed Sovietized Azeris are warm blooded people. Olar yakhchi adam dular.
The Republic of Azerbaijan should return to its motherland, Iran. 
Iran IS the homeland of Azeris. Khosh keisin.--Zereshk 09:23, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: To the "Azeri"s

message: There is noe historical data to back up the claim that modern Azeri's are decendants of the Sumerians or the Urartians.  Therefore I removed those two peoples from the article.--Moosh88 20:13, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: And it is Wikipedia policy to cite verifiable sources, so in an article this contested, these need to be especially authoritative ones. El_C 04:19, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have consulted various books, there are various elements of this article that are opposed. Are there no historians of the region in Wikipedia that could read this article, what I know of it, is that the first section is to be entirly writen, there is nearly nothing that could conform to the NPOV policy. Fadix 19:12, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  No proof 

message: I have no expertise on this topic but this edit came from a contributor many of whose edits have amounted to vandalism. Someone should check it closely. -- Jmabel | Talk 22:26, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Would someone please examine this edit? 

message: Dear user - the UN reference to Iranian Azerbajan has been removed, until evidence is shown. I also would like to commend user User:Tombseye for excellent edits on Ancient history of Azerbaijan, as well as supplying and correcting references I have assembled. I will try to follow this format. I am still continueing with contemporary and medieval history. Also very timely raised is DNA testing results from Univ. of Chicago.  Please raise any issues on these pages
:Yeah, hopefully this page can really be cleaned up. --Khoikhoi 01:58, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I'll take it down now. --Khoikhoi 18:32, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Hey guys. This article seems to have gotten very long and in some cases repetitive, so I'm editing as much as possible to make it clearer and easier to read as many of the links give in-depth information anyway so I'm shortening it as much as possible so that non-Azeris can better understand and get more out of the article. Hopefully, this article will be looking great real soon. Also, my recommendation would be to not add any more information unless absolutely necessary as the article needs to be readable for non-historians as well as historians. Let me know if this is all okay with everyone. I think the article is definitely more neutral and objective and I can't imagine why people would still complain or think it's biased as it it just relating academic information from the books and references noted. By the way, good job both of you! Tombseye 20:39, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I agree, I will not add anymore stuff, except correction of my own gram. errors, where I can. Thanks a lot for great work. I don't mind any edits, if I have any objections, i will correct them.
--User:abdulnr22:32, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool. Sound great Abdulnr!  Tombseye 22:50, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent edits

message: Today's Republic Azerbaijan has never been part of the historical land "Azerbaijan". There has never been a "partition", but the former Iranian province Arran was named "Azerbaijan" by the Russians to further expand their territiroal demands into Iranian heart-lands. As you can see in the map below (Abbasid Caliphate), modern "Azerbaijan" was known as "Arran", while today's Iranian-Azerbaijan is the REAL and HISTORICAL Azerbaijan:
right|Abbasid provinces during the caliphate of Harun al-Rashid
-Tajik 07:04, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not agree to this explanation. This article is about the history of today's nation-state known as "Azerbaijan". Since this region has never been part of the historical Azerbaijan, it has no right to claim "partition" from the region known as "Iranian Azerbaijan". All this "partition" discussion is being provocated by certain people who have certain agendas - most notably the "Gray Wolves" and their pan-turkist idelogies. Any claims of Azerbaijan on Iranian lands is baseless and illegitimate - historically and politically. The same goes to Pan-Iranists who claim modern Azerbaijan. It is important to mention that today's "Azerbaijan" used to be the Persian province "Arran", was then annexed by Russians who changed the name to "Azerbaijan" to expand their territorial demands into "Iranian Azerbaijan". Pan-Turkists simply continue this Russian tactic because of their own agendas. The terms "North Azerbaijan" and "South Azerbaijan" are historically and politically wrong, and thus should not be used in Wikipedia. Tajik 07:32, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the point is that there a people known as Azerbaijanis who live in the regions we are covering here. If you'll note, most of the time the references are to a people of Albania and as genetic testing of the Azeris points to their links to Caucasian peoples this is meant to be to understood that the Azeris as we know them spread out obviously after being the Azeris. In other words, the Albanians and others (possibly Iranian tribes in Iranian Azerbaijan) were Turkified and became Azeris who in turn now inhabit the region. Not sure what Pan-Turkism has to do with this as the only point here is that the Azeris speak a Turkic language and are found on both sides of the border and their history sometimes overlaps. It is not stated that they have always been Azeri etc. Also, the usage of "Iranian land" seems a bit strange since the Azeris are the predominant group in both north and southern regions. Are you saying they are on Persian territory or something because that opens up a whole can of worms here. Perhaps someone should find the descendents of the Elamites and give them the land. People write history. At some point people decided to call Persia, Persia even though the Iranian tribes that lived there weren't all Persians. Obviously, these are choices. Azeris were just called Turks before and probably quite similar to the Turks of Turkey and Turkmenistan language wise. See, the thing is that it was the Persian-controlled province you mean. The Turks ruled Persia for a while and I don't think you'd want to call it Turkestan. The Azeris still live there and in some way their history needs to be told. If it turns out that the Azeris are the Albanians who were turkified and then expanded then that's their history. Also, a lot of reference books use the terms south and north azerbaijan. Perhaps this is more of a Persian sensibility rather than an actual problem. Tombseye 09:45, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

text:  I do understand you points, but this does not solve the problem. This is not about Turkish-speaking Shia peoples (there are many Shia Azerbaijanis, and also many Azerbaijanis who do not speak Turkish) - this is about the POLITICAL history of the region known as "Azerbaijan". The nation "Azerbaijan" claims that this country was "partitioned", the same way Korea or Germany were partitioned. But this is not true. There has never been a partition but simply a name-change. This claim of "partition" somehow reminds me of the  Czech Republic where the western parts of the nation, known as "Sudentenland" is mostly inhabited by ethnic Germans. German nationalists still continue to call that region "Sudentendeutschland", the same way Turkish nationalists use the improper name "South Azerbaijan". Both cases are politically incorrect and wrong. However, this is not about how the country is called today - it is about how the nation got its name. It is about correct history. For more information, see the Encyclopaedia Iranica and "Azerbaijan": 230 - as correctly stated by the Encyclopaedia Iranica (the most authoritive work of Iranian and Oriental studies), there has never been a "partition". Tajik 23:22, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

text: WHy do the students of the Khazar Univeristy of the Republic of Azerbaijan claim that Iran and Russia divided their country? There was no partian just Russian annexing Iranian territory. A student at the univrsity asked the Iranian Ambassador to the Republic of Azerbaijan this!!!! They have never heard of the Treaties the Qajars signed???? What propaganda. Azerbaijan was a part of Iran for almost all its existance. 69.196.139.250 05:14, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The myth of "Azerbaijan's partition" 

message: OK, my father is an ethnic Azeri TURK from Hamadan Province (Iran) and my mother is Persian.  But let me make one thing clear...we Azeris are Iranian, yes, but we are NOT Persian.  In other words, "menim babam fars deyir" (my father is not Persian), nor does he like to be considered as such, since that is not his true identity.  I am not anti-Persian, after all, how can I be when my own mother is Persian?  Now, I do not favor total secession for Iran's Azeri provinces (East/West Azerbaijan, Ardabil, Zanjan and northern Hamadan province)...after all I come from a mixed family, and do not want to see my family split between two countries.  It is a known fact that because of the common Shi'ite faith, and common Iranian nationality, there have been millions of mixed Azeri-Persian marriages.  Also, Tehran is home to over 4 million Azeris, and it would not be an exaggeration to say that a large number of businesses in Tehran are Azeri-run.  Azeris are well integrated in Iranian society (being Shi'ite correligionists is one of the main reasons), and there are many Azeris in prominent government positions.  That said, it does not change the fact that Iran's mullahcracy is continuing the Shah's policy of stifling Azeri language and culture. Why should young Azeri children attending school in Tabriz have to learn arithmetic, geography and science in Persian, a language that does not come naturally to them?  Why does the Iranian government prohibit the Azeri language to be taught and used in schools, in newspapers, TV and radio stations?  The longer the Iranian mullahcracy denies the Azeris linguistic and cultural freedom, the more secessionist sentiments will grow in Azeri provinces.  I support autonomy for Azeri provinces, with respect for Iranian territorial integrity, so I am not for total independence and unification with the Republic of Azerbaijan.  My father always taught me "We are Iranians first".  I can appreciate that, but I am gradually getting fed up with Persian chauvinism and ethnocentrism, and I am becoming more and more sympathetic to Azeris who have nationalistic aspirations leaning towards Baku.  I cannot forgive the mullahcracy for supporting Armenia against fellow Shi'ites in Qarabag, not to mention this was a slap in the face for Iran's 35 million Azeris. Also, Iran allows Tehran's Armenians to hold demonstrations in front of the Turkish Embassy, but does not allow Azeris to hold demonstrations in front of the Armenian Embassy in Tehran. Enough is enough.  Yashasin torpaqimiz, yashasin xalqimiz, yashasin dilimiz.Azeroglu 00:03, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting view ... do you think the same way when discussing the problems of 15m Kurds in Turkey or some 1m Non-Azeris in Azerbaijan?! This is just a question, no offence intended. By the way, the number of Azeris in Iran is less than 15m. According to the CIA factbook, there are only 17m Azeris in Iran, according to the Encyclopaedia of the Orient only 12m. Encarta claims that all Turkic peoples in Iran count together some 18m. So, where did you get the 35m (making Azeris the largest group in Iran - keeping in mind that there are only some 34m Persians in the country). Seems to me like a cheap Pan-Turkist propaganda-number. Like saying that "there are more Kurds in Turkey than ethnic Turks" or that there are "more Tatis in Azerbaijan than ethnic Azeris". Tajik 23:26, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Excuse me when was the last time you went to Iran. There are a lot Azeri radio broadcasts, Azeri language papers in Tehran or Tabriz or other areas. WHat do you mean it is banned? Azeri is a protected national language. It is spoken freely by Azeris all over Iran. There are eeven private Azeris schools and Azeri is taught at university level along with Kurdish and other languages in Iran. So what is this TALE? This is untrue. I want to point out that in world reports Iran is deemed a freer country than the former Soviet Republics, all the Middle East (excluding Israel), much of Asia, and many other countries. Do you know who the biggest opponents and critics of Iran are? They are Iranians themselves becuase Iranians have a very strong sense of democracy, freedom, and politics. Even the label Islamic fundamentalist was one of Iranian origin becuase the post-1979 system of Islamic theocracy was too eextreme for them but is extremly tame compared to Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, etc. 69.196.139.250 05:06, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Azeri Identity 

message: Is it not true that most of what is today the republic of Azerbaijan was not called “Azerbaijan” before it was separated from Iran by Russians? And it was called Arran instead?  A few editors have claimed it and I have heard it from other people (mostly Azeri Iranians) as well. However it is not mentioned in the article so I was wondering if it accurate or not. 
I have never heard this claim from anybody other than Iranians so it is safe to say it might be biased and not entirely true.
I appreciate if some one could clarify it for me
Thanks   
Gol 05:57, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arran? 

message: As you can read in the information presented above, today's country "Azerbaijan" has never been part of the historical land known as "Azerbaijan". Therefore, there has never been a partition, as constantly claimed by Turkish nationalists. I suggest to re-write that paragraph and write the correct information in it. Tajik 23:07, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  the myth of "Azerbaijan's partition" 

message: Grandmaster,It isn't nice to delete refering to talkpage
: I’m still waiting for you to explain what’s wrong with the whole article. Tajik explained his problems with one of the sections, I think he just tries to deny obvious facts based on his POV, but at least we know what he disputes. Those who want to attach the totallydipated tag to the whole article should explain what their problem with the entire article is, otherwise anyone has a right to remove it. Grandmaster 09:03, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Copy-paste is a simple operation, and looks like you’ve learned it pretty good. But if you have facts and sources to back up your POV, post them here for discussion. If you think that you can add nonsense to the article and get away with it, you are wrong, my friend. Grandmaster 11:21, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Dear Grandmaster- You don’t discuss you delete! You try to solve the problem by erasing it. There is very good source in this talk page “Arran, The real name of the republic of Azerbaijan”. But you don’t tolerate referring to it then how can you talk about discussion. You will deny every reference. Believe me you will!!!"(Sampa 11:46, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Refering to talk page

message: Why do you delete the explanations about real history of republic of Azerbaijan, it is historical fact, why do you deny it, you can find truth in many academic references.
Dear friend, the truth, historical facts and academic references do not change by denial of the fanatic people like you.(Sampa 06:57, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Copy-paste is a simple operation, and looks like you’ve learned it pretty good. But if you have facts and sources to back up your POV, post them here for discussion. If you think that you can add nonsense to the article and get away with it, you are wrong, my friend. Grandmaster 11:21, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Dear Grandmaster- You don’t discuss you delete! You try to solve the problem by erasing it. There is very good source in this talk page “Arran, The real name of the republic of Azerbaijan”. But you don’t tolerate referring to it then how can you talk about discussion. You will deny every reference. Believe me you will!!!"(Sampa 11:46, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Fanatical!!!

message: Azerbaijan has bee a part of Iran for almost its entire existance. Russian annexed portions of it. You try and re-write history to indulge your wrong and amoral views. 69.196.139.250 04:56, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: GRANDMASTER YOU ARE A LIAR

message: Ok, what i'm gonna say here is that many persians whenever they are out of Iran if some one asks then "where are you from" they will just say persia, ok that's right they are persians, but i guess "persian" was just a name given from greek people to that dynasty at that time, but how long did it take? they were gone at the end and till 80 years ago in a country with the name of Iran no body was proud of being a persian, it means that they are right now, but what happened to other people who couldn't say they are persians, well i think it's not true to be proud of capturing egypt greece, and building up an empire and after 2500 years reminding that persia is the same as Iran, well it's a way of thinking but some people you know...
Iran's government tries to remove that part of history that was before persians so can say ok these persians are pure and noble people who used to live here since the begining, then how come "Perspolis" dosn't have even a roof? Why should azeris be proud of that, persians are dreaming of building up that dynasty again so they can capture the world, but how? price of blood? lots of nations won't let them, may be a few will support them, but some people should know terrorism dosn't mean anything if every body goes to defend.
what i say is if Iran is persia, then i rather not to be an iranian.
::Iran's government does ot try to do that this beyond POV it is pan-Turkist propaganda. I checke dout this users history who did not sign on the history of this discussion. It is very suspecious. ALl these sttments by so-called Azeris or so-called Iranians are really Turks trying to push there propaganda. Oh yes no one forgot how Kurds were so-called Mountain Turks in the past. Ya givce me a break with this rheotoric. If anything the Republic of Azerbijan should come be reunited with the Iranian motherland. Ask the majoirty of Azeris what there motherland is and the will proudly say Iran. 75%-80% of Azedris live in Iran and they know that their motherland is Iran not some 'theortical Azerbaijan that was divided'. That is so lame the pan-Turkist story and fairy tlale of how Azerbaijan was divided between Imperial Iran and Czarist Russia. That is so lame. The truth is the Republic of Azerbaijan was Iranian territory that was divided from IRAN.69.196.139.250 18:17, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Persia is just one part of Iran 

message: Grandmaster, I see you talk about discussion again. You are fantastic!!
: If this is a compliment, then thank you. I asked for explanation of removal of text from this article. It’s pretty normal to discuss your edits with other editors of the article before making them, considering that some of the latest edits are very questionable. Such edits should be discussed first. Grandmaster 16:00, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am sorry grandmaster for insulting  you!!(Sampa 22:31, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  You are fantastic!!