Talk:Persianization/Archive 1

Archive 1

reference to the term

do we have any sample of any book which used this Persianisation word ???/ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.235.62.248 (talk • contribs) 09:13, 27 November 2006.

Yes, we do... Khoikhoi 02:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

To Grandmaster -Request for Citation

You have added a citation to the above article: by using "Tadeusz Swietochowski, 'Russia and Azerbaijan: A Borderland in Transition. ISBN: 0231070683", described the official policy pursued by Reza Shah Pahlavi to assimilate the ethnic minorities in Iran. In particular, within this policy the Azerbaijani language was banned for use on the premises of schools, in theatrical performances, religious ceremonies and in the publication of books, I have checked the book and although there is a mention about Soviet penetration into Azarbaijan province, and the movement policy for Azari Language, but there is no such a entry as you stated. Therefore can I have the page number for the entry? Thanks Surena 07:31, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Please see the page 122:

The steps that the Teheran regime took in the 1930s with the aim of Persianization of the Azeris and other minorities appeared to take a leaf from the writings of the reformist-minded intellectuals in the previous decade. In the quest of imposing national homogeneity on the country where half of the population consisted of ethnic minorities, the Pahlavi regime issued in quick succession bans on the use of Azeri on the premises of schools, in theatrical performances, religious ceremonies, and, finally, in the publication of books. Azeri was reduced to the status of a language that only could be spoken and hardly ever written. As the Persianization campaign gained momentum, it drew inspiration from the revivalist spirit of Zoroastrian national glories. There followed even more invasive official practices, such as changing Turkic-sounding geographic names and interference with giving children names other than Persian ones. While cultivating cordial relations with Kemalist Turkey, Reza Shah carried on a forceful de-Turkification campaign in Iran.

Grandmaster 18:35, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - I've included in the article. Surena 07:34, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Lurs and Kurds, Persians Persianization?

Taken from the "Lurs" page, on wikipedia: "Lors are an ethnic group of Iranian peoples living mostly in south-western Iran. Lorish is a Persian dialect related to the Old Pahlavi (Middle Persian/Farsi) language."

And now this page: "In modern times, it is often used in connection with non-Persians such as Azeris, Kurds[3], Baluchis and Lurs, as well as non-Iranians living in Iran such as Arabs and Turkmens."

Seriously, how is it possible to Persianify some Persian tribes, and create a Wikipedia entry based on this wrong conclusion? How can you prove that People of Azarbaijan, with such a pure Persian name, are not Persian?

The entire Persianization page is just a personal research, not a Wikipedia entry, thefore must be changed as soon as possible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaahin (talk • contribs) 22:46, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

move?

persianisation is much more correct! Shj95 (talk) 04:21, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

2007-02-8 Automated pywikipediabot message

--CopyToWiktionaryBot 11:57, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

what is this crap? lurs/bakhterians/gilakis/mazandaranis/tajiks arent different they are a different persian tribe they arent ethnically different.also azeris werent turkish from beginning they were persians and spoke tati another persian dialect lik most iranians today speak which are persian dialects.

this page is pathetic and racist. so i changed some things. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.27.157 (talk) 23:46, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree this is an irrelevant text of a persofob person. Cultures and languages influence each other and change. Like french influence in europe, or english in world. /Robert 83.183.79.175 (talk) 23:08, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

This article is a personal research and not a scientific one

Badly written. Too poor article. Not any good scientific/historical/social references in this article. This article is 100% personal research and writing without any reliable resource. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.158.67.87 (talk) 05:48, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Update

I renamed the Urbanization section to Afghanistan and added more info to reflect the persianization of this Middle Eastern country. If you have questions about the changes made, please let me know. Thanks. Darwin Naz (talk) 23:22, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Persianized?

What is this article about?this is a personal research it absolutely has wrong information.Simsala111 (talk) 04:28, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Pakistan

@Zeex.rice: Since you don't seem to be able to find the talk icon, in order to be in accordance with WP:BRD, I do it for you. I still don't see what part of the article said that Urdu is an Iranian language and Pakistan a "Persian country".---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:04, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Apparently my edit summaries weren't clear enough. So let's get rolling. Firstly, if you check your desired version of the article, the text clearly states: "Though many call it a Indo Aryan language, many consider it to be an Iranian language as the heavy influence of Persian." One thing that should be clear is that nobody (or at least, not me) is disputing the fact that Urdu has been historically influenced by the Persian language; this does not, however, make Urdu an Iranian language — it is an Indo-Aryan language (feel free to look at any Wikipedia article or even an external source if you're convinced that it isn't). You can argue that this wasn't a statement of fact, and only an opinion, in which case, check out WP:Facts precede opinions. The passage I quoted above was cited in the article with a single source (despite the claim that "many consider it to be an Iranian language") from June 2002: this one here. It won't take long after reading it to see that the author, a Dr. Samar Abbas, is pushing his opinion throughout the article (which is fine by itself — everyone is entitled to an opinion, but until a universal consensus is reached, an opinion does not become fact; Urdu being influenced by an Iranian language does not make Urdu itself an Iranian language). I'll pull a key passage from the source for this sake:

"Urdu, like all Iranic languages, is thus linguistically and historically derived from Avestan, which is for Iranian languages what Latin is for Romance languages. It should be considered a member of the Iranian branch of languages. A short language tree would be:

Avestan -> Pahlavi -> Dari -> Urdu.

This article should remove all doubts about the real origin of Urdu."

You won't find any fact-based sources referring to Urdu as an Iranian language or that it should be considered one. If that was the case, there should be an argument to classify Urdu as a Semitic language since it has been influenced by Arabic as well.

As for the second charge, I'll once again directly pull the text from your revision: "Though many consider Afghanistan, Tajikistan, and Iran Persian countries, Pakistan is also included." Again with the "many consider" with no sources. In any case, I don't think I need to further explain what's written there; Pakistan is not a Persian country. When I edited the article, I never disputed or removed the fact that Urdu has been influenced by Persian, since that's the entire reason that Urdu is even on this page. I figured my edit summaries alongside the article history would be enough, but here's the full and detailed explanation. ➤ Zᴇᴇx.ʀɪᴄᴇ ✪ (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 03:52, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Sorry for the belated response and thank you for the time you spent here in order to clarify. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:59, 23 February 2022 (UTC)