User talk:Parishan/Archive 2006-2007

Azeris

Hello Parishian,

As an Iranian Azeri myself, I am perfectly aware of how we consider ourselves. The term "Azeri" will give the wrong impression to an exterior user, as it indicates the person is from Azerbaijani Republic because NOTHING is mentioned from their Iranian part. think about it, if a person who isnt an iranian or azeri reads the article and sees "him or her is of AZERI heritage, he is automiatically going to assume he is from Azerbaijani Republic. And this, as you will agree is wrong. And I, on behalf of Azeri Iranians, DO NOT consider ourselves part of the Azerbaijani Republic, we are Iranian. So please, I beg you, stop reverting these edits.

Please understand me, we are on the same side here! We both want to make people's heritage known, but we need to do it correctly. thankyouUser:Megastrike14

i see you are keen to make it known that individuals have Azeri heritage. I appreciate the importance of nationalism, however, it is encouraged to make ethnicities of individuals less common. thankyou User:Megastrike14

i would just like to say i did not speak to you in that manner, i was polite. and it is not right for you to judge me because of my editing history for the matter. I offer a suggestion, the term Azeri, is a term considered towards the Azerbaijani Republic people not the Iranian population. in your, please notify them as Iranian Azeri instead of Azeri. User:Megastrike14

Okay, accept everything you say. But it is still not correct for you to make accusations because of one's editing history. User:Megastrike14.

Look, i am an Iranian Azeri myself and I am very proud of being an Azeri. However, I am also very, very proud of being Iranian, probably similar to yourself:) but when things like "an Iranian of Azeri descent" is put down. This indicates that he is an Iranian who originates from The Republic of Azerbaijan as it does not mention the Iranian and Azeri together. Therefore, i try to make my edits of Iranian Azeris more accurate by putting things like "he/she is an Iranian Azerbaijani or Iranian Azeri to make it sound as if he/she is not from the republic, but from Iranian Azerbaijan:)

thankyou:) User:Megastrike14 Hello Parishan/Archive 2006-2007 and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

Good luck!

Lake Sevan

Hi Parishan, I just wanted to inform you about the three-revert rule, which says that no one can revert an article more than 3 times in 24 hours. Please stop edit waring, because if you continue you may be blocked from editing. A suggestion is for you to discuss your grievances on the talk page instead. Thanks. —Khoikhoi 01:51, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Azeri

Hi Parishan. I noticed your great contribution to Azerbaijan-related articles. Well done, thanks a lot. You may wish to join the Wikipedia:WikiProject Azeri, where we try to coordinate our activities on Azerbaijan related articles. Regards, Grandmaster 07:35, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vahid

I did that by mistake probably. I just assumed he was Iranian because of his name, which doesnt resemble the Russian style names of Azeri's from the republic.Khosrow II 17:24, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Weakest link countries2.png. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}. If you have not already done so, please also include the source of the image. In many cases this will be the website where you found it.

Please specify the copyright information and source on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. YellowDot 20:56, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion

Hey Parishan, nice work on the Urums article. You might try listing it at WP:DYK—perhaps you could get it to be on the main page! (simply add new suggestions here) —Khoikhoi 04:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting idea. Thanks! Parishan 06:27, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of city name changes in Russia and Soviet Union

Hi, Parishan! May I ask you why you unlinked a bunch of Russian cities/towns at List of city name changes in Russia and Soviet Union when you were making your edits? I can see neither pattern nor purpose.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 12:37, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I figured there was no point in linking names of tiny villages that are not likely to ever appear on Wikipedia as articles. If you think that was unnecassarily I don't mind reverting the page. Parishan 21:36, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation, but there were no villages in that list, only cities/towns. I am not going to revert now, but I will restore the links when I split the article (see Talk:List of city name changes in Russia and Soviet Union). Please, however, don't unlink any more entries—even when those red links are unlikely to get articles any time soon, they will need to get them eventually. Plus, these links are a part of a much bigger interlinking project. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 21:55, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Updated DYK query On 7 October, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Urums, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Congratulations! I saw it on the main page today. —Khoikhoi 03:23, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! And thanks for the idea too. Parishan 03:27, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Bir şey deyil. :-) —Khoikhoi 04:04, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another word of advice: when you create a new article make sure to announce it at Portal:Azerbaijan/New article announcements and/or Portal:Russia/New article announcements. Cheers. —Khoikhoi 04:35, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll keep that in mind. Parishan 04:48, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Shovkat_mammadova.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:43, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re

No problem! —Khoikhoi 03:13, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

I didn't realize that Iğdır had a significant Azeri population. I apologize for that. I am not "removing information having to do with Azerbaijan and Azeris from articles." As a matter of fact, I have worked constructively with many Azeri editors on Wikipedia and I have even helped develop the page on the Republic of Azerbaijan. I still find Baku87's map of Caucasian Albania questionable, however, and will continue to challenge it.

Now then, I'm not sure why, instead of being diplomatic towards me in your message, that you would present yourself as openly hostile with criticism for my political views. I mean you no harm in my edits and contributions and I apologize if I came off that way. If you must know, I am neither completely pro-seperatist or non-seperatist. I support Georgian unity (thus I am opposed to the sepratism of Abkhazia and South Ossetia which have historically been part of the Georgian nation) and I believe the best solution for Georgia in the long term is the establishment of a federal republic. I believe that the TRNC should work constructively to unify itself with the Republic of Cyprus instead of trying to seperate. I hold the view that both Greek and Turkish Cupriots should get along and that there should only be one Cyprus.

I support Nagorno-Karabakh's sepratism from Azerbaijan because I believe that at certain times in history, the region was part of Armenia and that Baku has proven itself unworthy of regaining it (with its constant threats against Armenia and its encouragement for public hostility towards Armenians). Overall, I hope that Armenians and Azerbaijanis can work together in peace and that Azerbaijan's claim over Karabakh is the only stumbling block between the two nations. I am sure that you have an opposing view and I really don't want to argue over this matter, so I won't go any further. This is just my opinion.

Again, I'm sorry if I came off as being brash. I hope that we can work together constructively on Wikipedia. Kindest regards, Clevelander 10:26, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I fully understand. Best, Clevelander 09:00, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I extended my hand in peace to you and instead you call cited contributions that I've made lies. Please know that I am willing to work with you, but I ask that you be considerate of others' additions. Kindest regards, Clevelander 22:44, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. I think in general, it would be better for us to discuss our edits calmly before throwing accusations at each other such as "liar." All the best, Clevelander 00:55, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cut-n-Paste move of Vladimir Abramovich Rokhlin

Please avoid Cut-n-Paste moves of the articles. It strips articles from their history and is a violation of the GFDL license. If you want to rename an article just press the "Move" button (next to the history). Please discuss the best name on the talk page of the article Alex Bakharev 02:22, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Antisemitism compromise

Parishan, I have removed the sections on antisemitism in Azerbaijan and Armenia on the Antisemitism article as a compromise with you. I just noticed your recent addition to the latter and I really don't want to get into a sort of "antisemitism war" by adding further information on the phenomenon in Azerbaijan.

Look, antisemitism has never exactly been big in Armenia, Azerbaijan, or for that matter, Georgia. In general, our people (Armenians, Azeris, Georgians, etc.) are very tolerant of Jews and other religious and ethnic groups. Those who are antisemites are in the minority. I actually have quite a few Jewish friends (including some Armenian Jews). Please understand that I request this for the benefit of both of our nations and for both of us representing them on Wikipedia. Let's just leave it to that instead of giving each of our nation's a bad name and a black eye. We are Christian and Muslim, we are children of God. Why must we attempt to prove each other's hatred towards another Western religion? Just to show which ethnic group, which nation, in general, is more morally superior? It's absolutely ridiculous and there's no point in doing it.

Hopefully, this will work in the long term. I feel that both Armenians and Azeris are good people (we got along for years together under Soviet rule) and I don't think that we should sink to this level. Kindest regards, Clevelander 11:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I wasn't planning on initiating a "war". If you look in 'history', you'll see that I've been adding or editing information on other countries as well. But if this is so important, then sure, I guess the article should be fine without that piece of info on the Caucasus. Parishan 04:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. :) -- Clevelander 21:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Paytakaran

Hi. I noticed you had a similar dispute on Caucasian Albania page, you may wish to have a look at this article's talk. Regards, Grandmaster 08:16, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please have a look here as well: [1] Grandmaster 10:34, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have made impressive contribution to Azerbaijan related articles. You may wish to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Azeri. Just put your name in the list of participants. Also, we have Portal:Azerbaijan, if you have any ideas on its improvement, or if you would like to update it with some information, you are welcome to do so. Grandmaster 12:43, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just noticed, I have already informed you about the wikiproject. Sorry for the repeat. Take care. Grandmaster 12:44, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:43 church1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:43 church1.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:05, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Azerification

Perhaps you could leave a comment on the talk page outlining specifically what you dispute, then hopefully we can come to a compromise. Also, when you edit war, people will tend to take you less seriously than when you try to discuss changes. Perhaps you might consider following the one-revert rule (I usually make two reverts). Khoikhoi 06:31, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Paytakaran, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. Khoikhoi 20:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For your outstanding contribution to Azerbaijan-related articles. Keep up the good work! Grandmaster 17:24, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I did not want to mess up your user page, so feel free to move the barnstar around. Grandmaster 17:24, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jalil Mammadguluzadeh

I edited a bit the article that I initiated. You may want to look at it again. Thanks for the material you added to the page. It needs a bit rearrangement. For example the name in Azeri should come first and the Persian one after that. But in my editor it looks strange when I rearrange it. I can not handle the paranthesis. I hope the article will be in a form that Azerbaijani people and also Iranian people enjoy reading it. happiness of all people was Jalil's dream during his lifetime. Thanks. Take care. Sangak 18:26, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Name of Turkey

Thanks for expanding the list! You are right, the country list wasn't such a good idea.. This is simpler.. Baristarim 20:23, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Paytakaran.
For the Mediation Committee, Essjay (Talk)
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.
This message delivered: 04:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC).

Nakhichevanski

Hi. I think the article about general Nakhichevanski should be called Hussein Khan Nakhichevanski, as the title Khan was officially part of his name and he was never called simply Huseyn Nakhichevanski. The one who refused from the title of khan was his nephew Jamshid, who was a Soviet commander and was forced to conceal his noble origin. Regards, Grandmaster 13:03, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, that sounds alright. Parishan 16:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ingilo

Hi Parishan. I made some corrections in the Georgians and Saingilo articles. I have to respectfully disagree with you in that the term "Saingilo" is not as "fairly recent" as you wrote in the Saingilo article. It appeared in the mid-19th century, not in the late 20th century. Indeed, the area had earlier been inhabited by the Albanian Hers (probably also by the Lpins and Tchilbs) who became assimilated into Georgians from the 7-8th to the 10th centuries. The region remained within Georgia until the early 17th century. The other part of ancient Albania which became Georgian was a northern portion of Gardman (Ge: Gardabani). Caucasian Albania is within the scope of my interest and I woould like to improve the main Albania article one day. Best regards, --Kober 05:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Would you be able to help me by adding sources to the Karapapak article? The whole article is unreferenced. Thanks, Khoikhoi 07:41, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! The article looks great. I have one question however: what is the Azeri name for Naghadeh? I noticed that the article at the Azeri Wikipedia is titled Nağadə, but you used the word "Sulduz." Khoikhoi 19:55, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for clarifying. Do you have any idea how to write "Nağadə" in Azeri, using the Persian script? Khoikhoi 03:11, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mail

Hi. Could you please enable your e-mail. Just add it to your preferences settings so that others could mail you, if you wish so. Thanks. Grandmaster 08:00, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Parishan 03:36, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sulkevitz

hello Parishan Why you oppose to Sulkevitz to be listed there? at the end he was our first chief of staff, he was of turkic origin like us and he was killed by soviets because he served our country, that sulkevitz did much more thing for our country that that Sona Babayi or mahammad reza pahlavi. do you think it is just to list those but not to list Sulkevitz? anyway, i am now searching for the more corect info about sulkevitzes and in these days in Zerkalo newspaper they are publishing articles about them. I think we should discuss it. Elsanaturk 16:26, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Armenians

With respect to a recent revert war in the said article: please discuss further changes on the talk page before reverting. --May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 06:00, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 06:15, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For continuing edit warring today, with another three reverts at Armenians and not a single edit to the talk page, you have been reblocked. Please use dispute resolution when you find yourself in a colflict, rather than reverting ad infinitum. Dmcdevit·t 05:45, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Armenians

Hello Parishan, while NK is de jure in Azerbaijan it is de facto independent. The problem with adding that category is that we cannot attach footnotes to it with all the de facto/de jure stuff. The article already mentions that NK is de jure in Azerbaijan.-- Ευπάτωρ Talk!! 19:26, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote number 9 covers it just fine, explaining the situation in detail. As for other Armenians, lets be serious. There are some Azeris in Armenia as well (one is a prominent soccer coach), adding Ethnic groups in Armenia to the Azeris article would just be silly.-- Ευπάτωρ Talk!! 20:15, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, there's just now way we can have that category, the one or two Armenians in Azerbaijan can't justify that. As for NK Armenians, I can't speak for others but I wouldn't mind adding "de jure in Azerbaijan" or something in the footnote.-- Ευπάτωρ Talk!! 20:48, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really need to, I have said more than enough actually. You need to explain why that category is absolutely necessary. Since that is meant to cover Armenians in NK it's obviously pov, and categories cannot be accompanied by footnotes in order to make them neutral, thus it should not be added altogether. Someone might see that category by quickly scrolling without knowing anything about NK or its current status.-- Ευπάτωρ Talk!! 21:19, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration

I have opened an arbitration case regarding the current editing dispute you've been involved in. Please make a statement at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Armenia-Azerbaijan concerning the conflict with the other parties listed. Thanks. Dmcdevit·t 10:26, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Thatcher131 18:21, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

McCarthy

He seems too controversial to use as a source. It would be like using Srđa Trifković, wouldn't it? I have no problem with using the Russian source you cited, as long as it is attributed properly. What does it say specifically? I cannot read or write Russian. Khoikhoi 08:55, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Arbitration Committee injunction

The Arbitration Committee has adopted a temporary injunction in the case of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan, in which you have been named as a party. The injunction provides: Until the conclusion of this case, all parties are restricted to one content revert per article per day, and each content revert must be accompanied by a justification on the relevant talk page. Violators may be blocked for up to 24 hours. The case remains open for the submission of evidence or proposals. This notice is given by a Clerk on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. Newyorkbrad 00:20, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images at Wikiopedia

hi, Parishan, thanks for uploading photo to Topchubashev. but can I ask a favour? can you also help to upload a picture to rasulzade article? of course i have many photos of him, of different ages and of different times, but I cannot upload any of them because i do not know how and the issues of copyright, which I just can't understand? if you want i can email some pictures to you or... how to do? please leave a note on my talk page. Elsanaturk 22:05, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

I restored the link to the Blue Mosque article. I will however not restore the link to the Erivan khanate article as it has more to do with Persian rule over Armenia than the status of Azeris under Armenian rule. -- Aivazovsky 01:20, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Azeris in Turkey

Hey Parishan. If you look at Khojaly Massacre for example, even statements that use neutral, third-party sources use the "according to XYZ" method. I think this actually goes in according to WP:NPOV more. However, I will ask other people's opinion on this matter, and hopefully we can come to a compromise. Regards, Khoikhoi 04:05, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Armenian articles and Aivazovsky

Yesterday while on recent changes patrol I noticed some changes that Aivazovsky had made and reverted them. I left him a message stating why I had reverted his edits. He replied to me with a message asking me to stop interfering. He then archived his talk page and "lost" my messages to him in the process. For that reason I have included my messages to him on my talk page.

I see that again today he is reverting your edits and labeling them as vandalism.

It has reached the point where I am considering reporting him for disruptive editing, but considering that he has agreed to arbitration (so he states) I am not sure that I should proceed. In your opinion, should I hold back on reporting his disruptive edit patterns and allow the arbitration to run its course? Regards LittleOldMe 10:50, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Azerbaijan PM and President Templates

Hi. I don't want a revert war; I've explained my position in the edit summaries. I can explain at greater length, but let's debate before mindlessly promoting our own versions. Biruitorul 08:28, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To be perfectly honest, I'm not an expert on the subject. However, wasn't the Russian republic also called the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic? Wasn't the TSFSR analogous? Are you saying that the Azerbaijani, Georgian and Armenian SSRs remained SSRs? Wouldn't they have been ASSRs? Or else what was the point of the TSFSR? Surely it matters that they were part of it, and it wouldn't hurt to indicate that. Biruitorul 06:50, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

vio arb com ruling, 3RR. Rlevse 02:34, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Batum

Hi, was the Batum region of the Russian Empire a Governate or an Oblast? Thanks! -- Aivazovsky 22:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Updated DYK query On 29 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Javad Malik-Yeganov, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

You're right this is no more than a little misunderstanding. Artaxiad nominated this entry, but forgot to credit you with its creation and at DYK we generally assume that unless something else is explicitly mentioned the nominator is also the creator of th article.--Carabinieri 08:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan

The arbitration case, in which you were named as a party, has closed. The decision is as follows:

AdilBaguirov, Artaxiad (formerly User:Nareklm), and Fadix are each banned from editing Wikipedia for a period of one year. Aivazovsky, Atabek, Azerbaijani, Dacy69, Elsanaturk, Eupator, Fedayee, Grandmaster, ROOB323 and TigranTheGreat are each placed on standard revert parole; each is limited to one revert per page per week, excepting obvious vandalism, and required to discuss any content reversions on the article talkpage. ROOB323 is also placed on civility parole for 1 year.

You may review the full decision at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan.

For the Arbitration Committee, - Penwhale | Blast him / Follow his steps 01:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I noticed your tag...out of pure curiosity... what do you have against marijuana? DeviantOne 02:06, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

That Swietochowski quote is different and is from a new source. It is also talking about the political entity of the Republic of Azerbaijan, not the history of the name of Azerbaijan in a historical context like the previous quote in the assessments section. That is why the quote was precisely put in the Azerbaijan as the name of an independent republic section. You can see the talk page for more information. Since I assume you did not know this, and probably thought that the quotes were the same, so now that you know could you undo your edit in good faith?Azerbaijani 15:00, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its not the same thing. One is talking about the Republic of Azerbaijan, and the other one is talking about Iranian Azerbaijan. See the talk page of the article.Azerbaijani 12:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The first quote is talking about the territory of Iranian Azerbaijan, saying that the area to its north was called Caucasus Albania and then Arran. The second quote is talking about the Republic of Azerbaijan specifically.Azerbaijani 14:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tat situation

Hey sorry for the late replay. It's tough to say overall. The Tats descend from Persians, but have changed so it's one of those it could go either way situations. I'm not familiar with their language and have only read of them in passing when researching the Azeris, but if their language is not mutually intelligible they should be considered distinct. In addition, they are related to other Caucasian peoples as they have lived in the Caucasus for so long that their links to the Persians have declined. They are definitely related and are an Iranian people, whereas their inclusion as a Persian subgroup would require linquistic similarity. Either way, it's hard to say. Sorry I can't be of more help. Cheers.Tombseye 22:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hi, parishan, can you please help to fix this problem[2]? i do not know how. thanks in advance. Ateshi - Baghavan 17:38, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Leyla Mammadbeyova

Updated DYK query On 10 June, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Leyla Mammadbeyova, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 01:34, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Parishan, I apologize to you for accusing you of being the anonymous editor. I realize that I was wrong. Houshyar 06:49, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arbcom

The Armenia Azerbaijan arbcom is once against being opened and you are an involved party: [3].Hajji Piruz 18:02, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Concerning Azari in Darya Dadvar

Dear Parishan, use of "Azeri" implies pronounciation of "Azarbaijan" as "Azerbaijan", which does not make sense to me. Further, in contrast to "Azer", "Azar" has a meaning (Atash, Fire); we have also the month "Azar" (Aban, Azar, Day, Bahman, Esfand); the word "Azer" has, rightly or wrongly, in my mind a very strong association with the Persian word "zer" (recall zer-zer --- a child does zer-zer). As you may have noticed, I love Azarbaijan and Azarbaijanis (I recently wrote the articles on the Behnam House and the Amir Nezam House in Tabriz --- I am not Anzarbaijani myself, however, I have very fond momories of all my Azarbaijani teachers; amongst other things, I owe my love of the Persian literature to my past Azarbaijani teachers who invariably were the finest people I can recall from my past) and do not wish their native language to be called "Azeri". Please therefore kindly revert your today's change of "Azari" into "Azeri", which you did also yesterday. In the meantime, I unreservedly apologise for having inadvertently and incorrectly referred to Azari as a Persian dialect. Before closing, coluld you please also have a look into the discussions section of the American Memorial School in Tabriz? There seems to be an error in one or some of the dates; no one has thus fur responded to my comment which I placed there sometimes ago. Kind regards, --BF 07:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Parishan, with due respect I entirely disagree with your reasoning for writing "Azeri" for "Azari". The fact is that the English-speaking people cannot dictate how a Persian word must be written or pronounced, as much as they might like to do so. The same applies for the Farsi-speaking people, who cannot dictate how the name of a British town or city must be written or pronounced, again as much as they might like to do so. Please note, I am not writing these from a nationalistic point of view, but purely from the academic point of view: if an Englishman is called John, a German has not the right to call him Johan on the grounds that in Germany they happen to use Johan for what in the UK is called John. We are talking about a Proper Name, which cannot be arbitrary. You mention "we call it in English", well you are calling things incorrectly and should correct your mistakes. "Azerbaijan" and "Azeri" do not exist, "Azarbaijan" and "Azari" on the other hand refer to respectively a known place and a known language (I do not know, and have never known, a single individual who calls "Azari" as "Azeri", leaving you aside as an exception). I emphasise, I have absolutely no problem if people wish to pronounce "Azari" as "Azeri" in their private homes; what I do object to is if they wish to impose their incorrect pronounciation on others and make it out as correct and standard. May I therefore request you kindly not to change "Azari" into "Azeri" in the texts written by me? I should greatly appreciate it. Thank you. --BF 00:15, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Parishan, you have totally misread and misunderstood me. I did not say that the word Azeri does not exist; I did say that the language Azeri (in contrast to Azari) does not exist; please read my text (everybody can make words; just put some letters next to each other and you have a word). Now, as for what Google says and what it does not say, for me Google is not a standard of scholarship; it is a repository of what people say and in general people say a great deal of incorrect things, and as I mentioned earlier I have absolutely no problem with what name people decide to give to things in the confines of their private homes. My argument was, and is, that one cannot take one incorrect pronounciation and turn it into a standard one solely on account of an incorrect public perception: take Frankenstein, over 90% of the general population think that Frankenstein is the name of that man-made monster, rather than the name of its maker. Does this make that we should accept what this 90% of the pouplation say, or should we go and read the book by Mary Shelley? As for what the Wikipedia says about Azarbaijan, I am well aware of that article and what it says; I have not made any attempt to put the wrongs in that article right simply becasue I have not the time to take on everything that everybody says; please just consider the volume of communication that I have had with you on the question of two letters, that is "e" versus "a" --- life is unfortunately too short to spend it on convincing all those 6,610,000 people who according to your Google research refer to "Azeri" (it is certain however that left to its natural course, the latter number will continue to grow, and of course your misplaced perception and your zeal in changing of "Azari" into "Azeri" in Wikipedia articles will only make the matters worst). You will have to accept it from me: I grew up in Iran, know the language and its literature, not a single soul in that country refers to "Azeri", except perhaps those who may have started learning things from Wikipedia and Google --- if you say "Azeri", either they will laugh in your face, or if they do not, they will do it later when they think of their conversation with you, for perhaps having taken Google too seriously. This is a fact, and I have no interest in bending facts specially for the present occasion. Now as for the Oxford English Dictionary, if you have the complete dictionary at hand, then you will see that the first reference, dating from 1888, is the following:
"1888 Encycl. Brit. XXXIII. 661/2 Azarbaijāni [note the "a"] Turkish. Ibid., Turki dialects (Derbendi, Azarbaijāni [note the "a"], Krimmi, Anadoli, and Rumili)."
Incidentally, the Oxford English Dictionary has no independent entry for either "Azeri" or "Azari". Be it as it may, an English dictionary is no authority on the pronounciation of Iranian names (to say otherwise smacks of the old-fashioned Imperialism), and vice versa --- I certainly do not consult an Iranian book when I wish to know something about a British province. A lexicographer (in this case of an English dictionary) just collects what others say; he or she has no independent mind of him/herself.
May I take this opportunity and refer you to the Wikipedia article concerning Hafez? There is a translation by Gertrude Bell, somewhere in that page, of one of the most beautiful poems by Hafez. I can tell you, it is one of the most appalling translations of any Persian poem I have ever seen in my entire life --- rather than translating, Ms Bell in her so-called translation simply demonstrates her utter ignorance of the Persian language; she also proves that she does not understand the poem itself (please do not take my word for that; ask a native Iranian read the original and the translation; whereas the original makes your heart beat twice the normal rate, reading Ms Bell's so-called translation has the effect of taking a cold shower --- and this leaves aside the fact that Ms Bell's translation is devoid of any hint that she understood the poem); yet she has had the brazen audacity to so-called translate that poem. I was shocked when I first saw that translation; clicking on Gertrude Bell, I immediately saw my suspicion confirmed: a student, fresh from classroom, looking for adventures (amply provided by the Middle East of her time), sent on an imperialistic mission, full of herself; having not set her feet in Iran, on the second day of arriving in the region deigns to translate Hafez. And now we have her so-called translation in Wikipedia (please read her biography, and it will not scape you that she has been full of herself; somewhere she says: "I'll never engage in creating kings again", this apparently after having Faisal crowned king of Iraq in 1921; according to the same article, "Bell earned the nickname, "the Uncrowned Queen of Iraq" --- it is no surprise to me that she has subsequently undertaken to so-called translate Hafez, having apparently taken some rest following the arduous task of crowning a king. Yet who is Getrude Bell in the annals of literature? I can assure you, no one! Her so-called translation of Hafez is a testimony to this statement. Gertrude Bell may have at best been the Paul Bremer of her time (which I doubt --- my understanding is that despite her bloated character, she has been no more than a little office subsidiary translating messages back and forth, between her superiors and the local people) and insofar as I am aware, Paul Bremer, to his credit, has no claim of being an expert in the Arabic or Persian poetry. Being in danger of being misunderstood, I must emphasise that I equally object to a man or a woman who sets his/her feet in an English-speaking country and on the second day fancies translating Milton. My problem is with people who have the audacity to translate a language or a culture without knowing either. In short, no matter how many people outside Iran say "Azeri", it is and remains "Azari". As I wrote to you in my first message, Azar has a meaning in Persian, Azer has none, except that when small children become unreasonable and start crying, they are said to do zer-zer. And that is what I subconsciously associate the word "Azer" with.
I propose that we conclude the present discussion just here, since by the end of the day there should be some bread on the table and I have to make sure that this is indeed the case; otherwise the kids will start zer-zer-ing. Kind regards, --BF 16:59, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My dear friend Parishan, I have no doubt in the sincerity of your statements, and as you have noticed I am not so pround as to avoid saying sorry when an apology is due. I precisely know what you are talking about, however my argument is that everyone who writes or pronounces "Azari" as "Azeri" is referring to a name which is non-existent in the Persian vocabulary; it is not a result of bad intentions, it is simply a result of not being so sufficiently familiar with the language as to be able to distinguish between distinct sounds: just consider how Russians pronounce "the" (they all invariably say "ze"); they pronounce "h" as "g" ("Gamiltonian" for "Hamiltonian"); this is not because they set out to mispronounce English words. It is just that beyond a certain age the majority of people lose the ability to notice subtle differences in sounds. I can imagine that an Englishman, or an American or a Canadian hears "e" for what to a native Iranian sounds "a". This aspect is relevant as regards the way in which phonetics get into dictionaries. Let us consider Oxford English Dictionary about which I may know a thing or two. They receive a letter from a member of the public about a new word. The letter contains supporting material, such as cuts from newspapers and magazines, etc. In which language are these material? Naturally in English. Who wrote the newspaper article which is now used as supporting material? Let us say, a journalist having just returned from Azarbaijan. How old is this journalist? A man or a woman in his/her forties, that is past the age when a human being can distinguish between subtle sounds --- just think of the names of the foreign politicians that one hears on the national radio and tv stations, which to my best judgement are all wrongly pronounced (I could compile a list consisting of twenty names just off-hand --- of the hundreds of people I know for years not even one pronounces my names correctly; some better, some worse, but none correct). He or she heard "Azeri" for "Azari" and in his/her article wrote "Azeri". Already this single article may have fixed the editorial policy of the newspaper for which this journalist works: for the sake of uniformity, henceforth this newspaper will be using the word "Azeri" for "Azari". Now, if the editor of OED decides to include "Azari" in the new edition of OED, he or she is in no position to include it as "Azari"; this by the fact that OED is simply a repository of English words as appeared in English. So, they include in OED "Azeri", and of course subsequently a certain Parishan considers that therefore "Azeri" should be accepted as the English word representing what in Farsi is "Azari". My argument is that on this matter OED cannot be authoritative; neither can Mirriam Webster Dictionary. Yes, they are authoritative as regards original English words, not as regards the words which belong to an altogether different language (and I just gave an example of how non-English words enter into English dictionaries --- I left it unmentioned that minor dictionaries just copy each other and the major ones; compiling a good and original dictionary is extremely labour-intensive and therefore very expensive). Indeed, my OED has the entry "Azerbaijan", and no entry for "Azarbaijan"; surprisingly, however, the same dictionary gives a quotation from 1888 in which one sees both "Azarbaijan" and "Azarbaijani" (please consult my previous writing). Does this mean that I have to accept this, no, of course not, for the reason that I just explained: someone, who does not know the language, got something terribly wrong at some stage; why should I fall in the same error, when I know better? Please note that errors by others do not absolve us from doing the right things. I believe that as responsible citizens, rather than repeating these mistakes we have the obligation to communicate our findings with the respective dictionaries, requesting them to examine the entries that concern us, rather than repeating their errors and thus perpetuating them. With kind regards, --BF 01:58, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Parishan, you seem not to wish to give attention to what I write. That is fine with me. I have no more to say and close the discussion here. But remember, humans have their destinies in their own hands, they need not (but they can, if they so badly desire) behave like slaves to the dictates of some unknown lexicographer in some dank office somewhere; speakers of each language are the true owers of that language, not some uneducated careless hacks. As for Greeks, I am sure they can speak for themselves. I close the discussion here and wish you best. --BF 10:41, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Parishan, just wished to let you know that if you interfere with my language once more, I shall lodge an official complaint against you for your persistent vandalism of my text. I have lost my patience with you, and I should like to tell you that my belief in your intellectual integrity will be the next casualty of this sad affair. Don't you have anything better to do with your time than roaming Wikipedia articles and applying your incomplete knowledge of a perticular language to them? According to your own statement in your Wikipedia page, your Farsi is average (which you give me reason to doubt --- please find some Iranians and pronounce "Azeri" and then carefully watch their faces --- someone who does not know this, cannot know the language, or perhaps "average" means something different to you than it does to me). Please just write something new and creative for Wikipedia; for instance, write an article on the etymology of the words "Azeri", "Azari", "Azerbaijan" and "Azarbaijan"; in your scholarly article you can then enumerate your reasons why my use of the word "Azari" must be wrong. Please note that your present actions, showing utter disrespect to my considered opinions, do not shed a positive light on your intellectual attitude, I regret to say: you have clearly proved to be impervious to reason, and this is not a characteristic of an intellectual or someone who aspires to be one --- my basic assumption is that those who spend their leisure time on Wikipedia must love and respect knowledge, so please do not prove me wrong in this assumption. --BF 15:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Parishan, I requested you to conclude this saga. The fact that you count the number of entries on Google, the number of your Wikipedia contributions, the number of your barns, etc., just proves to me that we belong to different planets; I find such attitude highly anti-intellectual (this is not what I mention solely to you, but to anyone who behaves like you). You should just ponder on the fact that qualitative matters cannot be quantified; it is common nowadays to quantify everything, but that is simply a sign of our declining appreciation of the fundamental issues that distinguish humans from automatons. Our appreciation of, say, the revolutionary paper by Einstein on General Relativity, cannot be quantified, say, in terms of the number of times that that paper has been cited by others, yet that is how nowadays academic works are ranked; scientific journals have got Impact Numbers, etc. We have become a people who know the price of everything but the value of nothing. Can one quantify one's love towards one's children? Now, if you are not convinced by my arguments, it is in my opinion because apparently you read, but do not sufficiently contemplate. The problem of fundamentalism of any religious hue from which the world at present is suffering, can be traced back to the fact that some people read a particular holy book and put to action what they just have read, without contemplating the context of what they have read. In the case at hand, apparently you have seen something in Mirriam Webster concerning a Persian word, and that apparently has convinced you that you must have some special right to impose your shallow knowledge on others (I say "shallow", because if you knew Persian in any depth, you would not have consulted WB of OED to find out about the word "Azari"); in a way, in the present context you are treating WB as a holy book and consequently the rest of the world should shut up if they cannot get themselves to be grateful to you for your efforts (`Henceforth shall "Azari" be called "Azeri", even though the latter is a nonsense word to those who know the language, leaving aside the undisputed fact that it sounds ugly and uneducated.'). Please note that I would have said exactly the same thing if an Iranian with insufficient knowledge of the English language would have started imposing his views on the names of the languages spoken in the UK (my approach to the present problem is absolutely not nationalistic, but aims at maintaining purity in things). Many of the words presently in use in Modern Persian can be traced back to words used in Old Persian (take the words Darya and Dadvar about which I made some comments in my recent article). The word "Azeri" is simply unknown to me --- it amounts to an invention which has nothing to do with what I know as "Azari". If you think you know better, then I am affraid that you will have to find the root cause of your viewpoint. I offer one possibility for this: there is something called preception of cultural superiority; adherents to this viewpoint consider their own culture as superior to those of others, to the extent that they can dictate to the people of other nations how they should pronounce their languages, "Azeri", as opposed to "Azari", to name but one example. Just ponder on this; once you have done so, then you will realise that your insistence on a matter for which you can only cite English sources can deeply offend those who demonstrably know their mother tongue. You may wish to consider to talk with someone who teaches Persian in the university which is close to your home town; he or she may be able to help you. You should certainly stop viewing Wikipedia as a place where one can dump what one has just read somewhere in some book. --BF 14:51, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Parishan, please stop writing to me, as I requested you already for a number of times! You just confirmed to me what you had set out to dispel. You say: "But guess what: no one cares what the word sounds like in Persian." Is this the respect you have for a language spoken by others? Has that occurred to you that in its various forms, Persian is spoken right to the western border of China? Does Persian mean to you anything? or are you out there merely to impose your mistaken views on others on a language you know about only through secondary sources? Incidentally, if you do not care, why do you care so much about "Azeri"? Further, I did not insult you in any way: I simply recounted facts taken from your own text; it was you who presented me with the number of your achievements and credentials on Wikipedia (I had never asked you about them, and why should those details have been relevant to the discussion at hand, except for reasons that only you should know). If you felt insulted by me, recall that you just saw your own words in my text. Lastly, you accuse me of "spilling your [my] esoterism on me [you]". Where did I do that? What was esoteric about what I wrote to you? You further say: "when you get to edit the Persian ... whatever magnificent knowledge of the Persian language you possess ...". Is there anywhere in my text where I boasted on what you call my "magnificent" knowledge of the Persian language? Knowing that "Azeri" is wrong and "Azari" is correct is not an indicator of one's possible magnificent knowledge; it is just common knowledge which one acquires by having grown up in Iran --- nothing special about that, as that is the mechanism whereby cultures, that is all cultures, are passed down from one generation to the next. In short, I am not aware of any hint in my texts that would imply who I am, what I know, what I do, etc. I just wrote to you about a single word, that is "Azari", with no reference to any personal credentials, which I may or may not have. No my dear friend, if you felt offended by my words, you should seek the reason for that inside yourself.
I just received your second message. What you say is not true. You say:
"P.S. Nobody in Iran calls the language Persian, they call it Farsi. You should stop contradicting yourself by calling it Persian."
"Persian", from the Greek word Persis, is the English word for the Modern Persian word Parsi, which has its root in the Old Persian word Pārsa and the Middle Persian word Pārs (the word Pārsā, an Avestan word, is the modern Farsi word for Devout, Absteminous, A God-fearing person). The word "Farsi" is the Arabicized version of the word "Parsi". As you may know, the Arabic language has no letter "P" and consequently many Persian words with initial letter "F" are the Arabicized forms of original Persian words with initial letter "P". The province now called "Fars" is the province "Pars", etc. (I have no problem with Arabicized Persian words). Now, if people in Iran refer to "Persian" as "Farsi" it is because "Parsi" has become archaic; "Parsi" is nonetheless a Persian word, with a long history (see above), found abundantly in literary texts (such as poems, both classical and modern). Now, compare this with "Azeri". The only thing that this word has in common with "Azari" is the four letters "A", "z", "r" and "i"; that is all. I have written to you repeatedly that I am unable to trace the root of the word "Azeri" in Persian --- I conclude therefore that it must be the work of some illiterate hack, which you so avidly are trying to perpetuate (I am mystified by your blind adherence to your secondary sources of information). The word "Āzar" is a variant of the Persian word "Ātash" (both Avestan words), which means fire. We also have the month "Āzar" whose root lies in the old Iranian calendar of Zoroastrian origin. Iranian folklore has it that the names "Azari" and "Azarbaijan" refer to a main characteristic of the Azarbaijani people, namely that they are serious people whose anger is like fire; it consumes any one who dares to interfere with their business. Many constitutional revolutionaries of Iran were from Azarbaijan, and I have no doubt that the entire nation feels indebted to them for their courage, sacrifice and dedication to a worthy cause. Now, given these facts, please do not call their language "Azeri". Aside from all else, "Azeri" sounds just ugly; some feel for aesthetics would prevent one from using this word. --BF 18:28, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Azeri

In English, Azeri is not considered a pejorative term. See Merriam Webster Dictionary: 'Azeri'. Parishan 05:01, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, perception of a word as pejorative is not dependant on the language used as much as it is dependant on the context. --TimBits 06:35, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, - Penwhale | Blast him / Follow his steps 16:43, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yaşar Əliyev

Hi. I won't revert your edit once again on Yaşar Aliyev because I simply don't care about this article. But I can't approve it. How can you seriously write that Yashar Teymur oğlu Aliyev is "is how Azerbaijani names are ALWAYS transliterated"? Why should the "ğ" be kept while the "ş" should be "transliterated" by "sh"? Either you change the whole spelling (Yashar Teymur oloo Aliyeff), or you keep it completely (Yaşar Teymur oğlu Əliyev). There is no happy medium. I strongly oppose every kind of "transliteration" of a language written with a Latin script to another Latin script. As it is done on French, German and Polish Wikipedia, this article should simply be titled "Yaşar Əliyev". If it is not, why shoud we keep native spellings for other languages (German: Richard Wagner and not Richard Vagner; Polish: Lech Wałęsa and not Lech Vawensa; Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz and not Vladimir Simoshevich; Turkish: Beşiktaş and not Beshiktash, and so on) and not for Azerbaijani, or Turkmen, or Uzbek? How will we discriminate betwwen the "good" languages and the "bad" ones that must be transliterated? And don't tell me it's all about the Azerbaijani "ə" as I was too often told: the same endless discussion happens allways about Turkmen President Gurbanguly Berdimuhammedow's name despite the fact this spelling has no peculiar letters. (PS: You can answer here rather than on my own talk page if you want) Švitrigaila 10:09, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kazakh Jews

Some sources using "Kazakh Jews":

--Jayjg (talk) 01:25, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Europe?

Which parts of Azerbaijan are in the European continent? AlexanderPar 09:04, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


On Forough Farrokhzad

Parishan, I do not wish to waste time on useless discussions. Just wish to let you know that you have proved yourself to be a man or a woman who has a single aim in life: roaming pages and changing "Azari" into "Azeri", and the like. Believe me, I do not wish to denigrate you, as no one is perfect (and I should be the first one to confess to that for myself), but you seem to be so focused on a single issue that I feel at the same time both surprised and sad. Your behaviour seems to be utterly compulsive. Please note that I am not doubting your sincerity for what you are doing; I am deeply concerned about your evident compulsive behaviour; you have proved to be utterly, and utterly, impervious to my long arguments about why in texts related to Iran and Iranians "Azeri" makes no sense. You are simply insisting to perpetuate an error on a subject that, on the basis of all evidence that I have from you, you are utterly ignorant. This urge in you is something I fail to comprehend.

Above this text I read a complaint by Švitrigaila from which I deduce that you are making yourself an un-welcome guest on other pages of Wikpedia as well. Your response on his/her page shows that you have claims on being expert not only in Persian but also in other languages. I have no evidence, whatever, that you know any Persian let stand at an "average" level (I will certainly officially contest your claim on your page that your Persian were "average" at a later time should you decide to persist on interfering with my texts --- you never came up with any supporting evidence from Persian texts or literature; your strongest "arguments" seemed to be based on some numbers harvested on Google; you even demonstrated not to know the origin of the word "Farsi"). Not to my surprise, from your response to Švitrigaila it appears that you may have gained your knowledge of the Azarbaijani language by looking through "a foreign ("travelling") passport of" someone "from Azerbaijan". If so, this suggests the worrying prospect that you may be considering the contents of passports as constituting literary works. In the same response you confess that "That's why that vote was initiated in the first place, and that's why I still refuse to concur with the final decision,". So you seem to be an impulsive individual who forces his/her one-sided views on others and when a decision is made refuses to concur with the decision!!! Have you ever asked yourself whether you respect anyone at all? Please do not write to me; I have had enough of you and your actions in the past weeks.

I end this note by telling you that should I once more see you changing in the pages related to Iranian personalities the word Azari into Azeri (I have absolutely no problem with whatever you decide to do in the pages relating to the Republic of Azarbaijan/Azerbaijan, as I have no claim on knowing the language or culture of the people of the Republic of Azarbaijan), I will raise the matter to the highest level in Wikipedia, which will be either your place or my place, but not both; you seem not to wish to co-exist (mind you, despite all my arguments, I have never attempted to change "Azeri" into "Azari" outside those entries directly relevant to me owing to my personal contributions towards their present forms). Now you should know what your choices are. --BF 04:52, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Parishan, you have a problem which you have to solve it by yourself, which is ascribing things to me which are not by me. I never introduced myself, either to you or to anybody else for that matter, as an expert in whatever language and if there is any language that you might have inferred from my correspondence as being the language of my expertise it was Persian; yet you say: "user who considers himself a more reliable source on the English language than dozens of Anglophone Ph.D. scholars from all over the world". Where did I introduce myself as an English expert? (I hope that you are not implying that someone who is an expert in English has anything to say about the Persian language, unless that person is simultaneously an expert in the Persian language, otherwise I will consider your statement as seriously offensive.) In your first message to me you ascribed to me the statement that "Azeri" did not exist; yet despite my later remark that you had entirely misread my message, one week later you did not hesitate to use the same misreading in your arbitration statement (in normal circumstances I tend to call such behaviour as disingeneous). I never called anyone a "mindless hack" (read my texts); once I wrote that a lexicographer who compiles an English dictionary which is supposed to record words as printed in English texts (I was explicitly discussing the OED), cannot have her/his own mind on what is correct or incorrect; s/he just records, as much as s/he might like to do otherwise (please read my text), what s/he is presented with to record; I said all these in the context of explaining to you the ease with which an incorrect spelling can enter into dictionaries. Find a piece of text by me where I might have called those experts of yours as "mindless hacks" (I did use the word "hack" but not "mindless hack" let alone "mindless hacks" --- I wrote that compiling an original dictionary is very labour-intensive and thus expensive and that, as a consequence, majority of dictionaries just copy other dictionaries; when I referred to a "hack in some dank office somewhere", I referred to those busily copying dictionaries by others; yet you do not hesitate [and did not hesitate in your arbitration piece] to accuse me of having labled your "Ph.D experts" as mindless hacks). It seems to me that in the absence of any solid evidence with regard to correctness of the word "Azeri" (which might very well be the way in which the word is pronounced in the Republic of Azarbaijan --- as I said before, all my statements have bearing on the way this word is pronounced in Iran) you feel compelled to make false accusations against me. I advise that you first read my texts and then ascribe things to me that are truly ascribable to me (this for your own sake, for I have said what I have said). My only point in the course of the past two weeks has been: No human being in Iran pronounces "Azari" as "Azeri", for the various reasons that I have already discussed. Now, if there are so-called experts who think otherwise, they should stop calling themselves experts. Consider someone who would claim to be an expert in the western classical music, however has never heard of Beethoven (for clarity, I am not an expert in music). And so is it with "Azari"; someone who claims to be an expert in Persian language must know that in Persian "Azari" is pronounced as "Azari" and not as "Azeri". Notwithstanding all my detailed explanations, you introduced "Azeri" into the entry of Forough Farrokhzad, not once, not twice but thrice. This is what I call compulsive behaviour. As you may know, Forough Farrokhzad spent a great deal of time in Tabriz and even adopted a son there. In spite of this, I cannot recall her ever pronouncing "Azari" as "Azeri". You may be whatever you claim to be (dedicated, hard-working, etc., and I am prepared to accept that you are genuinely all of these), but as a human being I can only record my own personal experiences of your actions towards me in the course of the past two weeks; I have experienced you, rightly or wrongly, as someone with fixed ideas, as someone who is not prepared to accept a very basic fact that I as a native speaker of the Persian language am making a point that s/he must consider. This, combined with your various remarks (one of which betraying that you even did not know the root of the word "Farsi"), have left me with no alternative but to consider you as a compulsive individual. If you are not such an individual (as said, as a human being I am only able to know you through your actions towards me; to say otherwise would be a lie), then you will have to prove it to me that I was wrong. We had decided to leave the matter to arbitration by others, and yet you proved unable to abide by our mutual agreement through thrice changing "Azari" into "Azeri" in the entry of Forough Farrokhzad. What was I supposed to do? To praise you for your diligence on Wikipedia, while experiencing you as an unruly individual in need of constant watching?
Finally, I absolutely agree with the basic principle that your personal correspondence with others is none of anyone's business. However, things change when I discover that your problems with me are not unique to me. As for your "multiple-sourced arguments", I am aware of three sources mentioned by you: (1) Two large numbers harvested from Google, (2) OED, (3) Mirriam Webster Dictionary. Google doesn't count, for the simple reason that you can even establish that in my correspondence with you I have used as many times "Azeri" as "Azari", if not more. Does this mean that I favour "Azeri"? Concerning the OED, I wrote you time and again that OED is not a primary source (not even in English --- it is however a relatively reliable record of English words); I mentioned to you for a number of times that when I wish to know how an English word is pronounced, I do not consult a Persian dictionary. The same as regards the Mirriam Webster. Concerning the OED, I myself told you two additional things: (i) my OED has no independent entry either for "Azeri" or for "Azari"; (ii) it has an independent entry for "Azerbaijan", however its first quotation refers twice to "Azarbaijan"; it gives as its source the Encyclopaedia Brittanica of 1888. Therefore, as I told you, one of your three sources (of which one being Google) partially rules against you. On this, you asserted that 1888 was too far in the past. Well I do not know from whose perspective you were speaking, but the word "Azar" is several thousand years old (read some Avestan texts, to begin with); the distance between 1888 and 2007 is a thin layer of time in comparision with the history of the word "Azar". I conculde therefore that your so-called "multiple-sourced arguments" amounts to a figment of your imagination, as I am aware of not a single genuine argument by you, academic or otherwise, why "Azeri" should be acceptable. Incidentally, you would oblige me by citing the names and the academic credentials of those "dozens of Anglophone Ph.D. scholars from all over the world" to whom you are referring. If they are such great experts, as you claim, I might like to read something written by them and eventually have some correspondence with them. Having said all these, I nevertheless propose to end this unproductive correspondence here. Wish you best. --BF 13:12, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Parishan, I know what you are getting at and have always known this, from the very moment that I received your very first message. I disagreed with you then and I disagree with you now. Nothing is fixed, even the mountains move; if I live long enough, I will get "Azeri" changed into "Azari", no doubt about that. As you must know, for centuries is was "fixed" that the Earth was flat; it was "fixed" that the entire visible sky consisted of concentric shells of stars revolving around the Earth. All these views changed and changed irrevocably. Those who "fixed" the Persian word "Azari" as "Azeri" did that out of their sheer ignorance of the language, of the culture and of the folklore of Iran. You may not know it, but there are Old Persian scripts (such as can be seen in Persepolis or in Bisotun) whose evolved forms I can see in the scripts of Modern Persian, Arabic and Hebrew. The "A" in Azari is written in the Modern Persian script (which you just typed in your message in connection with the word Azari) in almost exactly the same form as it was written in the inscriptions of 3000 years ago. These are cultural hertitages of the entire humanity and we cannot lose them. They are subtle things which link us to the origins of the human civilization as we know it today (I am not talking about the civilization in China or even India; they had parallel but different developments); it does not belong merely to Iran, it belongs to the entire world; if you want to understand the old and new testaments, you will have to be aware of all these subtleties (although I do not know Aramaic, I can understand what is spoken when the speaking is clear). When I hear Old Persian read out, it is like hearing a sound recorded on a magnetic tape over 3000 years ago; I hear the Modern Persian in it; I recognise words, I hear voices of people who died over 3000 years ago. Can you not feel the sensation of hearing voices of people who lived some 100-200 generations ago? That is why I insist on the purity of sounds. This change of "Azari" into "Azeri" looks to me quite frankly like raping a word which has survived several thousand years of history; I cannot put it better and more frankly. Imagine an analogue master tape which one digitises to some kilo bits per second. Once that has been done, the subtle contents of the sound on the master tape will be lost for ever. This is what happens with our languages. Change "Azari" into "Azeri" and in two generations hence another link with our history will have been lost. To summarise, the entire world may say "Azeri", but that does not change my resolve in maintaining that it is "Azari", has always been "Azari" (Encyclopaedia Brittanica of 1888 had it remarkably right --- what is more, Encyclopaedia Britannica had the "z" in "Azari" denoted by "d" and that is remarkably accurate --- Persian has two sounds for "z", the second of which is unfortunately lost, as alomst no one can tell the difference between the two --- fortunately the notational difference is still there; the actual sound of "z" in "Azari" corresponds to this second type of "z"); those modern dictionaries that make "Azeri" out of "Azari" sell people ignorance as knowledge. --BF 23:13, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Azerbaijani footballers

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article List of Azerbaijani footballers, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Jogurney 15:38, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Salam

Salam Parishan! Mən Azərbaycan Vikipediyasından Vusal1981-əm. Adətən Azərbaycan kinosu ilə əlaqədər yazıram. Sənin kinoçularımız və sənətçilərimiz barədə yaratdığın məqalələri tqdir edirəm. Ama xahiş edirəm məqalə yaradanda onun Azərbaycan variantını da qeyd edəsən. Hələlik bəzi məqalələrim qısadır. Amma yaxında onlar da zənginləşəcəkdir. Bir də sənə təklif edərdim kinolarımızı da tərcümə edəsən. Buna sənə cinema.aznt.org kömək edər. Mənim vaxtım yoxdurə Çünki az vp-də iş çoxdur. Mənə kömək etsən minnətdar olaram. Xahiş edirəm cavabını buraya yazasan : [4]

Uğurlar!

Hi

I responded in here, and as I said you are welcome to put it back. take care--Pejman47 02:38, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2 Closed

The above named arbitration case in which you were named as a party has closed. The remedy is as follows: The remedies of revert limitations (formerly revert parole), including the limitation of 1 revert per week, civility supervision (formerly civility parole) and supervised editing (formerly probation) that were put in place at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan shall apply to any editor who edits articles which relate to Armenia-Azerbaijan and related ethnic conflicts in an aggressive point of view manner marked by incivility. Before any penalty is applied, a warning placed on the editor's user talk page by an administrator shall serve as notice to the user that these remedies apply to them.

You may view the full case decisions here.

For the Arbitration Committee, - Penwhale | Blast him / Follow his steps 00:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shushi Massacres

Pls first read the talk page to ask questions and revert. Everything is explained in the talk page! About Turkish-Azeri: You know that Azerbaijani name accepted by Caucasian Tatars in 1918 so no statistics are available before that writing about Azeri population. Also Azeri and Turks sometimes means the common etchnics (otherwise we will change the text for example in Anti-Turkism). Anyways, if you think Azeri is more correct, you can try to change it. Hope no problem with sources! Andranikpasha 08:10, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reverts on Shushi Massacres

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. .Andranikpasha 10:24, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnic Mongols in Russia

Hi, either your source is wrong, or you're not reading it correctly. There are several hundred thousand Buryats living in Russia, which are a subgroup of the Mongols, and there are a few smaller subgroups as well. The number you give looks much more realistic (but still small) if you just count immigrants from Mongolia. For comparison, there are roughly 3,000 Mongolians, mostly students, living in Germany. Please don't just blindly copy numbers, but try to apply a minimum of common sense when interpreting them. --Latebird 14:06, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do NOT repeat your edits without prior discussion. Other than you claim in your last editor note, the Buryats ARE Mongols according to the definition used in that article. If you would like to change the focus of the article, then you're welcome to make a proposal on Talk:Mongols, and see if you can get a consensus for your views. --Latebird 13:45, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV fork Azeri waffen ss

Salam Parishan ,I need your help. I made recently a heavy revision of the Azeri in Waffen Ss formation page. The original page was so weak and full of errors that it was impossible to “fix”it . So I decided to write a new one.This is considered as a Pov fork and the page will be deleted soon. Like I am new on Wikipedia I ignored this rule and now I do not know what to do. I have gathered lots of infos about this topic while working on the biography of a well known Azerbaijanese historical figure issued from the emigration.Could you give me some useful advices of what I should do .Sag ol Zulfugar 10:00, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reasoning?

You recently attached a {{hoax}} tag to an article about an Azeri poet. May I ask why? DS 13:26, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy note

Please see here [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Arbitration_enforcement#Parishan. I'm going to sleep now, good night. VartanM 09:53, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The difficulty with evaluating a report like this is that it is impossible to say for certain whether this was an act of intentional disruption without being an expert in the topic and making a content decision. That it was an intentional act of disruption to make a point is certainly one reasonable explanation, and I think a word of caution is in order. In the future, please follow the naming guidelines here:

I am not an expert, but it appears that this instruction and the linked guideline suggest that the article header should only include widely used common current alternate names for the place in question. Historic names and names that are not widely used could be included in the body of the article with appropriate references when the name is controversial. Controversial naming issues should be discussed on the talk page. Thatcher131 01:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DYK nom

Is this Ok with you? The article currently is 1585 characters ... it needs to be over 1500. A critic may say that currently it contains a lot of chars that are just a list of her work. Is it possible to expand it a bit? I would also like to add an infobox... OK? Victuallers 17:44, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Updated DYK query On 21 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sakina Akhundzadeh, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Wizardman 15:36, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last revert on Shusha

Hi Parishan! pls at first look at the Shusha talk page and discuss there. I just want to say to use my username at editsummary during the unexplained reverts more carefully. Im not the author of the text you reverted (Im just a supporter open to discuss at article's talk page). And we're using the editsummary to describe our changes related to the topic, not each other. Thanks in advance! Andranikpasha 13:57, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Parishan, I reverted you on the Shusha article, because you didn't justify or explain the reason for the revert. Regards. VartanM 23:49, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Updated DYK query On 7 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hamida Javanshir, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Royalbroil 02:52, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK Medal

The DYK Medal
For having numerous articles featured in the Did You Know section on the main page, I award you this long overdue DYK Medal. Wear it with pride, and keep the articles coming! Royalbroil 05:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Azerbaijani language map query

Hi, I have raised a question at Talk:Azerbaijani language#alternate map that concerns you. John Vandenberg (talk) 09:13, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Incident of Tolishi Sedo and Azerbaijan page.

The incident of Novruzeli Mammadov was referenced in Washington Profile and referenced there in my first edit. I added another reference and reverted your edits. Here is the link of the news where it mentions the supposed crimes by the Talishi scientist: http://www.anspress.com/nid51166.html

Obviously these charges are source of concern by international community as receiving funds to do research and academic discussions about history are not crimes elsewhere. Here is what the newspaper says:

Editors of "Tolishi sedo" newspaper took stand of betrayal of country

Azerbaijani well-known poet Nizami Ganjavi and historical hero Babek were shown as Talish in these materials published in the newspaper.

Court consideration on the cases of Novruzeli Mammadov, Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences Linguistics department chief, editor-in-chief of” Tolishi sedo” newspaper and Elman Guliyev, official of Linguistics Institute was started in the Court of Grave Crimes today. Shakir Alasgarov presided at the trial. Court consideration was held behind closed doors. Answering the questions of Ramiz Mammadov, lawyer of defendant Mammadov, Guliyev admitted that Iranian Talish Study scientist Ali Abdeyin rendered amount of financial assistance to “Tolishi sedo” newspaper. Azerbaijani well-known poet Nizami Ganjavi and historical hero Babek were shown as Talish in these materials published in the newspaper. It was shown in the newspaper that Turkish came to Azerbaijani regions afterwards where Talish people live and these lands were Talish lands historically. Guliyev admitted that they received $1000 a month from Talish organizations in Iran. Trial will continue in the second half of the day. Novruzali Mammadov was detained on February 3 and Yasamal Court passed decision to arrest Novruzeli Bayramov for 15 days. Novruzeli Mammadov faced charge under Article 274 (State betray) of Criminal Code on February 17. Elman Guliyev is also accused of the same article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Persian Magi (talk • contribs) 15:38, 30 December 2007 (UTC) [reply]