Talk:Azerbaijanis/Archive 5

message: Guys, I raised this question here previously (which has been archived without being answered or resolved!). The question was “What does the article want to say?”. In that question I asked how were we going to classify/identify Azeris? Would we use language? Race? Culture? History? What? 
All these arguments you are having here now is because that question was not answered at the beginning! I can see some people using different cards as and when it suits them! Language becomes the common denominator when it suits them then race when it suits them, then culture and history when it suits them.  Why don’t we agree on a common denominator? Is it because there isn’t a good one? 
What constitutes in a group of individuals being classed as one people? Language? Culture? Race? History? Or the combination of some or all of these?
: We cannot decide that. We only report what authoritative sources say. Grandmaster 14:09, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The articles here are written in accordance with certain rules. Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research are some of them. To include something in the article you should demonstrate the source of info. Grandmaster 12:39, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Who is an Azeri according to the article?

message: It's this a new Style of Rassismus ala Hitler or what ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.72.9.106 (talk • contribs) 13:48, 25 September 2006.
:What's wrong with a little genetics? —Khoikhoi 01:41, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe they are scared of the results? And last I checked, Hitler and the Nazi's never used genetics. LOLKhosrow II 02:01, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Azeri Genetic" 

message: Please do not remove sourced material from the article, specially the material from Encyclopaedia of Islam.Heja Helweda 20:44, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The new encyclopedia of Islam does not consider TOP SECRET declassified information that were recently published by the former USSR within the last 5-10.  This changes a lot of the equation and views on Ferqeh.  Note the classified documents were memos from Stalin to Baqeroff himself.   So unless you have new sources that take this major historic viewpoint shift into account, then it is considered obsolete with that regard.  Plus this is not an article on Ferqeh to write 20 lines on it.   --alidoostzadeh 21:38, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

text: To give example, Encyclopedia of Islam does not even call Iran Iran but Persia and Iranian citizens as Persians despite if even they are not ethnically Persian! LOL Khorshid 06:50, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The Encyclopaedia of Islam is an authoritative source written by experts. If anyone wants to disprove the EI, he/she has to come up with REALLY good literature. Tājik 10:19, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  True it is good on historical aspects.  But information on modern politics can change.  The new released top secret materials that are memo's from Stalin to Baqirov is a case point.  --alidoostzadeh 14:15, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The removed sentences were about linguistic and cultural grievances of Azerbaijanis at that time, this does not need top secret documents :) Heja Helweda 00:43, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  This article is not about Ferqeh.  And I disagree that there was wide linguistic grievances as the government of Pishevari would not have fallen in oneday if it was popular.  Also any analysis of the movement should take the above unclassified secret materials into account since they effect all aspects of the image of Ferqeh. --alidoostzadeh 02:30, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  We cannot rely on our individual beliefs, it is safer to refer to some academic sources. If you can provide any scholarly source regarding your beliefs, it would greatly enhance the article.Heja Helweda 05:27, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with alidoostzadeh, your additions are highly speculative and POV. On top of that, your selective "academic sources" are not verifiable as the links you've provided require registration. --Mardavich 06:25, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

text:  According to Iran: A country Study by the Federal Research Division, Kessinger Publishing , Without Soviet Backing, the Pishevari government collapsed and Pishevari himself fled to the Soviet Unition.  I can show great many instances where the Pishevari government was despised and that is why it collapsed without any resistance unlike the Kurdish democratic party which had some grass root support amongst Sunni Kurds.  Also the Encyclopedia of Islam article is old whereas my unclassified top secret sources are new and show there was no internal movement that led to such a party but it was the sole external creation of Stalin.   It was previously unknown to some (not all) scholars why the Pishevari government all  of the sudden rose up after the USSR invasion of NW Iran, but with the new unclassified information, everything is made clear and the new analysis on the movement should mention these three important sources something the OLD encyclopedia of Islam article does not and tries to find reasons.  There is nothing POV about the unclassified top seceret documents showing that the creation of the party was directly by the order of Stalin and thus it was no internal movement within Iran  and it collapsed the first day the USSR left within 24 hours.  --alidoostzadeh 09:22, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

text:  There was no irredentist movement, except what the USSR created by the direct orders of Stalin as the unclassified top-secret information clearly establishes.  It is true that Persian was declared the only official language since 1906 (before Pahlavi and during the constitutionalist movement) and the Pahlavi's only thought Persian the official language in school except for few cases.  And there was a Zoroastrianist campaign which was more at an attempt for de-Islamification of Iranian society much like Ataturk's de-Islamification campaign.  But as for choosing the name part, I disagree since majority of Iranians have Arabic names, and Turkish names like Yashar, Aidin, Sanaaz are as popular as any other name during the Pahlavid era.  A good example is Shohreh Aghdashloo who is the wife of Aydin Aghdashloo.  Of course there was more serious Azerification campaign of Kurds, Talysh and Lezgins and etc or even more serious one in Turkey and Ba'athist Iraq.  I am not sure how much of all these informations are relavent to Pishevari.  But the current discussion is about Pishevari's movement and there should be a separate article on Ferqeh and Pishevari.  According to Iran: A country Study by the Federal Research Division, Kessinger Publishing , Without Soviet Backing, the Pishevari government collapsed and Pishevari himself fled to the Soviet Unition.  Not much of a popular movement, if it collapsed less than a day without USSR backing.  It actually collapsed in about a  day because people of Tabriz actually revolted against it and there is a lot of memoirs about this as well another source I brought from Professor. Hess.  I am not sure putting up two three pages about Pishevari movement is a good idea on this article and it should have it's own relavent article.  It was previously unknown to some scholars why the Pishevari government out of the sudden rose up after the USSR invasion of NW Iran, but with the new unclassified information, everything is made clear and new analsysis should mention these three important sources and I am of the opinion that any old analysis is obsolete because of these three important sources which shows that the party was created by the direct order of Stalin.  --alidoostzadeh 09:11, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information about Pishevari 

message: Is there a difference?
I always thought Azeri would refer to the ethnic group and Azerbaijani to anyone living in Azerbaijan.  Correct me if I'm wrong. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Xpehbam (talk • contribs) 18:43, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Azerbaijani or Azeri? 

message: According to the article the number of Iranian Azarbaijanis is estimated to be at least twice to three times the size of the people in the Rep Azerbaijan (some even estimate 4-5 times), so WHY most of the pictures are from Rep Azerbaijan? Haven’t Iranian Azarbaijanis got any famous athletics, artists, writers, scientist, and other personalities? This is defiantly a breach of impartiality and must be corrected immediately.   Kiumars 00:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Disproportional representation

message: Azeri nationalism has oscillated since the Islamic revolution and recently escalated into riots over the publication in May 2006 of a cartoon that many Azeris found offensive."Ethnic Tensions Over Cartoon Set Off Riots in Northwest Iran", The New York Times (retrieved 12 June 2006)"Iran Azeris protest over cartoon", BBC News (retrieved 12 June 2006) The cartoon was drawn by Mana Neyestani, an ethnic Azeri, who was fired along with his editor as a result of the controversy."Cockroach Cartoonist Jailed In Iran", The Comics Reporter, May 24, 2006 (retrieved 15 June 2006)"Iranian paper banned over cartoon" , BBC News, May 23, 2006 (retrieved 15 June 2006).
::How is "Azeri nationalism" related to the riots over publication of the cartoons? This should be changed. --Rayis 13:16, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, I wasnt there for the protests myself, but I dont believe they were out of nationalism, but rather disgust. I dont understand, because the cartoonist was Azeri himself.Azerbaijani 14:46, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have tried to word it more to be more neutral now. --Rayis 22:45, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Azeri nationalism 

message: Today Azeri's are Turks and speak Turkish. Why are we treated like animals in this article? why are some people trying to categorize us and playing around with who we are.
What on Earth is this Iranian or Caucasian "theory"? THEORY! what has this got to do with us. Identity is based upon perception, not among genetics or race. Who cares what colour, race or genetics we have the fact of the matter is we are Turks.
Why isn't there a section on Turkey Turks claiming they are Hitites, Galatians, Lydians, Lykians? they arn't "pure" Turks, who on this Earth is "pure" for goodness sake.
It's simple, today Azeri's are Turks. There have been many people's on this ancient land and many have mixed with us but today we are not Persians or Caucasians were Turks why can't some Iranians stomach this.
     There is a difference between what azeris are called and what is their origin....
     Ok...Todays' Azeris are called Turk..but Origin section and Genetics section are taking about the origin of Azeris.--behmod talk 22:53, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The article is derrogotory and fascist, what has Genetics/Race got to do with ethnicity 

message: Why? I was watching the tape a few hours ago! My understanding is that all you need to put a crap on Wiki is to have a source! I have a source! It may be crap but it is a source! Like most of the carp sources provided on Wiki! Do I need to be a non-Muslim to put on a crap source?  Kiumars 22:26, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:POINT. Khoikhoi 22:48, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Someone deleted “The X-Files theory Origion”!