Talk:Bahmanyar

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bahmanyar's ethnicity[edit]

From the source calling him a Persian, I have seen no viable argument nor source(s) that consider him anything else. --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:05, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

you can read Zakir Mammadov's books and research or simply read this article [1][dead link]

Bahmanyar Azerbaijani's ethnicity[edit]

I have nothing to say. I have seen so many Wikipedia articles that attacks the history of Azerbaijan. Even his name has the word Azerbaijani. Please change this big mistake and stop attacking our history. --Oyuncu Aykhan 3:33, 19 march 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oyuncu Aykhan (talk • contribs)

Reverting My Edit[edit]

My edit was not "unreliable self published source". My sources were from Zakir Mammadov and [2], they are reliable. Jobas (talk) please fix this issue, because my culture and history is beign attacked. --Oyuncu Aykhan 4:25, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it is a self-published source. "azerbaijans.com" seems to be a personal website. Who is even the author of that article? -- Mazandar (talk) 01:08, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
How is your 'history and culture being attacked'? He was of Iranian origin. The name 'Azerbaijan' is Persian and has been used for centuries, even during the pre-Islamic period. Take your historical revionism somewhere else please. --HistoryofIran (talk) 01:08, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
HistoryofIran do you know what are you talking about? The whole "Azerbaijan is Persian" is a Iranian propaganda. Because they don't want a rebellion in South Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan has 4 to 5 thousand years of history. Armenians and Persian attack it. It is not only the history that is being attacked. Our culture, our instruments, cuisine music etc. are being attacked by the "Persian" dictators. Also Mazandar, It isn't a personal website. I didn't gave 1 source. There were books that were written by Azerbaijani historians.
Maybe try reading a history book not written by a turk for once in your life. "Azerbaijan" has no meaning in any turkic language, it comes from "Aturpatkan" meaning "protected by fire" in Old Persian. There is literally no trace of any turkic presence in Iranian Azerbaijan before the Seljuk era (1050 AD). Your people (turks) have no claim on any history of the region before the Seljuks, this man lived under the Daylamite Sallarid dynasty, before any turk stepped foot in Azarbaijan. --Qahramani44 (talk) 9 December 2018
l o l. --HistoryofIran (talk) 21:12, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ethinicity (part II)[edit]

Извест- ный азербайджанский философ XI в. Бахманйар ибн Марзбан был учеником знаменито- го философа Абу Али Ибн Сины.

Source Сара Ашурбейли - Государство Ширваншахов [1983], page 183 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shahanshah5 (talk • contribs) 15:19, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Shahanshah5: Could you please speak in English since you're on the English Wikipedia ? Second, finding a source is not enough to edit Wikipedia, you have to cite a reliable source for that. Are the two authors of your source historians ?---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 15:27, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikaviani: That book is Russian, so I have put citate in its original Russian.

Second, author of both sources is the same historian ( see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sara_Ashurbeyli ) whose sources are using on wikipedia. For example, if you'll look at sources under this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirvanshah, you can see ones from this author - Ashurbeyli.

@LouisAragon: Your insight would be appreciated since Shahanshah5 is presenting a source in Russian that i cannot read, which supports, according to him, the Azerbaijani ethnicity of Bahmanyâr. This seems highly dubious to me, since there was no "Azerbaijanis" 900 years ago. I think that the author means that Bahmanyâr is from the nowaday geographical region of Azerbaijan, not ethnic Azerbaijani. Here a quote from Henri Corbin about Bhmanyâr (page 129) :"Nor does anything point to the authorship of another disciple of Avicenna, Bahmanyâr ibn Marzubân, the good Zoroastrian from Azerbaijan known for his work that is a compendium of the master's"


Here again, another author points to the fact that Bahmanyâr was born in Azerbaijan (page 186) "The most famous of Ibn Sina's student who became a close friend. Born in Azerbaijan.
Thanks.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 08:48, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@LouisAragon: Let's you don't will manipulate over that he was born in Azerbaijan.
@Wikaviani: Since you praised I made the inline citation from reliable source which clearly mentioning Bahmanyar as азербайджанский философ what means Azerbaijani philoshoper, now I sincerely wait for your putting back source in article.
@Shahanshah5: Please be patient, if LouisAragon agrees with what you say, then i'll add back the Azeri claim along with your source. However, you can see that there was already a discussion about this issue and the least i can say is that there was no consensus for inclusion. The fact that you might have found a source supporting your POV does not mean that it will automatically be added, i would suggest you to read this. Please keep in mind that Wikiedia works with consensus. Thanks.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 12:22, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We can't add your claim because:

  • It sounds just like the other claim in the above section (irredentist POV). Azerbaijani is a modern Turkic ethnic group. Considering ethnogenesis of Azeris and their timeline, how a person from Sallarid era could be a Turkic-speaking Azerbaijani?
  • Your source just calls him Azerbaijani without providing any evidence about his background. How he was an Azeri? Per what evidences? Language? Family or what other evidences?
  • In comparison with current cited sources and per WP:WEIGHT, you can't add a random source (which is against other reliable sources) unless you find other sources that support it. By other sources, I mean you should find quality sources from experts (e.g. western scholars, encyclopedias, or academic references).
  • WP article A is not related to WP article B. If A uses some stuff as its citations, it does not mean they're reliable or they are suitable for other articles because they may be non-reviewed leftovers or the cited stuff are not really WP:RS. --Wario-Man (talk) 18:39, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, this kind of claim is quite exceptional and a single source is not enough for inclusion.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 23:40, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Wario-Man: * Do you think Azerbaijanis since their existing are Turkic speaking?
                    * If you are interested in, then you can do some google.                   
                    * Saying current cited sources you mean those ones which sent LouisAragon?
                    * Do you mean if Ashurbeyli is reliable historian on Shirvanshah article she may be non-reliable historian on Bahmanyar's article?
                    
                    
                    : @Wikaviani: Have many cases when wikipedia uses just a single source.
Non-RS nonsense. These are the same "historians" who claim that Iran and Armenia are "ancient Turkic lands", and that anything from Derbent to Urmia, Zanjan, to Kars etc is part of "Bütöv Azərbaycan" that used to exist "since times immemorial". No self respecting Western historian takes these "books" serious. Azerbaijani (SSR and post 1991) and Tsarist/Soviet Russian sources are mostly packed with agenda-loaded propaganda, refuted/debunked by leading scholars in the West. Here's an example.[3] The same thing goes for many Armenian and Georgian sources of the Soviet era. They should all be avoided. - LouisAragon (talk) 18:00, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, here smells Azerbaijanophobia ;) First of all Bütöv Azərbaycan is other deal but if you want talk about such case then I can remind you Pan-Iranism about which has opinion one of Western historians (from who you wish citates here), Leonard Binder :

Pan-Iranism had a brief ideological life among a small group of Iranian fascists, but has fizzled and seems unlikely to gain new life. Like pan-Turkism, its essential aims are irremediably irredentist, evoking images of Nazi-era expansionism. For pan-Iranism, the irredenta are Bahrain, parts of Afghanistan, parts of Central Asia, Caucasian Azerbaijan, and the border regions of Iraq[1]


And secondly, since all Ashurbeyli's books are focused on the territories of Azerbaijani Republic so here is clear that she wasn't caring about lands in Armenia and Iran.

  • "Do you think Azerbaijanis since their existing are Turkic speaking?"
I was curious about User:Wario-Man's opinion on Azerbaijani ethnogenesis so I asked him the question which isn't your business User:LouisAragon :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shahanshah5 (talk • contribs) 13:50, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, and Alexander the Great was a Macedonian Slav. ;-) "Do you think Macedonians since their existing are Slavic speaking?" ;-) We're not adding this pseudo-historic revisionism. Not a chance. - LouisAragon (talk) 12:14, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Do you mean if Ashurbeyli is reliable historian on Shirvanshah article she may be non-reliable historian on Bahmanyar's article?"
Thanks for mentioning the Shirvanshahs, removed this non-RS source from that article as well.[4] - LouisAragon (talk) 12:17, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Ethnic conflict and international politics in the Middle East. University Press of Florida. ISBN 9780813016870.

Requested move 2 September 2020[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. —usernamekiran (talk) 06:37, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Bahmanyār → Bahmanyar – No need for macrons, we don't tend to use that (WP:USEENGLISH). --HistoryofIran (talk) 02:42, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support – Per nom. - LouisAragon (talk) 09:02, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per The Oxford Encyclopedia of Philosophy 2014, Janssens Ibn Sina and his Influence on the Arabic and Latin World 2020 etc. displaying the long vowel Bahmanyaar through a macron is standard scholarly practice. Wikipedia isn't the Daily Mail. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:48, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The first source uses macrons for everything. The second simply calls him Bahmanyar with no macrons, however, I can't access much of the book, so I may be missing something. If we had to use macrons for Bahmanyar then what's stopping us from doing it to the rest of Persian and Arabic name articles? --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:17, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This article has had a long vowel since 2007 without anyone objecting, so evidently nothing was stopping it. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:34, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That wouldn't surprise me considering the fact that he isn't a well-known figure and the article was a stub till I expanded it yesterday. Anyway, my question was more like; why don't we use macrons for the rest of Persian and Arabic name articles, which clearly doesn't have them? EDIT: looking at the history of the article, it's original name was Bahmanyar, but was moved without any explanation or discussion back in 2009 [5]. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:50, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Probably because the MOS for classical Arabic and Persian names is dormant. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:15, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Nisba[edit]

I've removed "al-Adharbayjani" from his name, since there is no clear proof that it was ever part of it. Islamica has his full name as "Abu al-Hasan (or Abu al-Husayn) Bahmanyar ibn al-Marzuban", while Encyclopaedia of Islam has it as "Bahmanyar ibn al-Marzuban". It is not even certain that he was from Azerbaijan, Islamica says this: "Bahmanyār is said to have been a Zoroastrian from the region of Ādharbāyjān", while Encyclopaedia of Islam doesn't even make any mention of Azerbaijan. Both sources state he may have been the son of the Bavandid ruler in Mazandaran, al-Marzuban. --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:40, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, his nisba seems to be al-Marzuban, rather than al-Adharbayjani.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 19:51, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bahmanyar&oldid=1205623917"