Talk:Azerbaijan (Iran)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:South Azerbaijan)

last edit - POV pushing[edit]

Last edit is clearly POV pushing, and at least contradict references which in this sentence. A lot of discussion held here. Any new edit should be discussed thoroughly before edit made.--Dacy69 19:30, 24 May 2007 (UTC) Now it reflects both points of view, I hope with reference # 1,2 for one sdie and reference # 3,4 for another.--Dacy69 19:32, 24 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I updated some info on recent history--Dacy69 16:56, 11 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

it was not updating, it was blatant pushing by a handpicked of obscure sources, I revert until you at least show consensus for it. --Pejman47 17:03, 11 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is reliable sources and well-known facts. what you are doing is blatant vandalism.--Dacy69 17:09, 11 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dacy, stop spamming articles, this issue has been addressed already in its proper article.Hajji Piruz 17:09, 11 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There have been three references removed from the article. Can you please, provide:
1. detailed reason for reverting
2. detailed reason for claiming "obscure sources"
3. reference to the "proper article" in Wikipedia, where "this issue has been addressed already".
Thanks. Atabek 17:18, 11 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Claim on that page was that information is irrelevant to foreign relations. here it is about domestic policy. It perfectly suits. That's it. Indeed, sources which I used on this page was used on that page - Iran-Azerbaijan relations and stiill on that page. So, you just in tandem try to remove sourced information. Multiple sources which introduced here will be approved by any third party mediator.--Dacy69 19:28, 11 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am adding Amnesty International source - Its reliability is not under question.--Dacy69 19:33, 11 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pejman, you are blindly reverting wothout any reasonable discussion--Dacy69 20:07, 11 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

you said you are going to only insert the amnesty international sources and mentioned it in your edit summery, but then you just reinserted your obscure sources. I ask you to think about your edits. --Pejman47 20:18, 11 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
you said that it is obscure sources. I added Amnesty International to support it. You blindly deleted it. Now I am opening request for comments case. Next - I will have to draw attention of admins to your actions if you were persistent in deleleting multiple sourced information.--Dacy69 20:27, 11 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request for Comments[edit]

I request a link to the Republic of Mahabad page concerning the mentioned "soviet supported republic in the area" - benuminister 2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benuminister (talkcontribs) 22:26, 26 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unfortunately most of facts about Azerbaijan history and current situation intentionally has been mixed with fault information. I am the PhD student and my studies shows that the only confidential source about Azerbaijan history is the book of Prof. Cavad Heyat entitled "Iran Turklerin Aski Tarixi". —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:20, 10 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The dispute regarding update on the recent history of Iranian Azerbaijan - events of May 2006 and others involving riots supressed by police caused by cartoons published in an Iranian newspaper insulting Azerbaijani identity. Edit [1] was supported by multiple and reputable sources, including Amnesty International. Editors user:Pejman47 and --User:Alborz Fallah without reasanoble arguments blindly delete edits.--Dacy69 20:22, 11 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

With regard to comments below "A - The first two sources and Cristian Science Monitor are not international sources" (???) What it means? Pls. see Wikipedia guidance on sources. We need NPOV sources and non-obscure one which is the case with CSM and other references. As far Amnesty International - I introduced it because Pejman47 questioned sources on its notability. Amnesty International confirms which other sources reports.--Dacy69 02:09, 12 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments of Editors Involved[edit]

A - The first two source of information , [2] and The Christian Science Monitor are not international sources.
B- The Amnesty International USA 's Annual Report , is not related to "History" section of Iranian Azerbaijan as we don't see such a report Amnesty on Azerbaijan on history section of Azerbaijan or any other country in Wikipedia:Israel , USAand etc--Alborz Fallah 22:20, 11 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments of Third Party[edit]

Dacy69 is trying to spam several articles with the same information. This information is already mentioned in the proper articles. It has nothing to do with the Iranian region of Azerbaijan or its history. This isnt the proper place for the information Dacy69 wants to insert. Again, this information has already been inserted in the proper articles already and has absolutely nothing to do with Iranian Azerbaijan or the history of Iranian Azerbaijan.Hajji Piruz 22:23, 11 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You should have some decency. You are involved in many dispute on similar topic and still commenting as third party. You are making comments on editor rather than on subject matter. I'll take note. Ok. Now about the subject. Then you have not explained where this information is covered and why the description of important recent historical event should not be in the article.--Dacy69 01:29, 12 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't understand why Amnesty International info was removed. Please provide a good reason for deletion of sourced info. Grandmaster 06:55, 12 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree with Alborz, this is an article about a geographical region, don't insert irrelevant and poorly sourced "Human Rights reports" into the article. Otherwise, there would be no end to it, and next we would have a section with "Human Rights reports" about the conditions of Talysh, Tatars and Kurds on Azerbaijan Republic article. Wikipedia is not a forum or a soapbox. AlexanderPar 08:38, 12 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And the same information on human rights of Azeris in Iran is already available on Azerbaijani people, Iranian Azeris and Human rights in Iran. Wikipedia is not a soapbox, you can not spam Wikipedia articles with the same information on four different articles. The article Azerbaijan (Iran) is a geographical article, not an ethnic one. AlexanderPar 11:02, 12 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Text inserted is not about human rights per se. It is about recent historical events. Secondly, it is based on multiple sources, Amnesty Inetrnational is one of them. But editors, like pejman and Alborz, remove all of them.--Dacy69 13:28, 12 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If the same event pops up in a number of articles it shows that we need a separate article about the event. Controversy over Anti-Azerbaijani cartoons or something. Then all the articles could use only a short phrase linking to the controversy article or even the link in the See also section. Any takers? Alex Bakharev 14:36, 12 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is already covered in two or three articles already.Hajji Piruz 14:42, 12 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I liked this idea. Issue might be covered exactly in many articles. Invasion in Iraq is mentioned thousand times. Still, my edit was not only about cartoon issue but other events in 2007. For now, I will work on the article on cartoons and then we can make proper edit here.--Dacy69 14:49, 12 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree with Alex Bakharev, I think this article is absolute necessity to reflect the historical events. Since events did happen in past, they're quite relevant to history section, and withholding of them, especially provided sourced information does not make sense at all.
Regarding AlexanderPar's comment, I welcome him to refer to the State Department as well as CoE and PACE reports on conditions of minorities in Azerbaijan. For comparison, those conditions aren't nearly as abysmal as they're in Iran. Thanks. Atabek 14:53, 12 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I created the article: Iran Cartoon Controversy.Hajji Piruz 15:05, 12 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have created article with name which distort the nature event and plus you filled it with unsourced POV information. therefore, I think now we should resolve this whole issue here.--Dacy69 16:19, 12 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]


As per advise of third party a new article created Azeri Cartoon Controversy in "Iran" Newspaper. Further it was advised to use only a short phrase linking to the controversy article.--Dacy69 16:08, 13 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

you are not entitled to "summarize" the debate which you were part of it on your behalf!, let other non-involved do it and see if there will be any consensus or not. --Pejman47 18:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
News-type stuff should go to Wikinews, not Wikipedia. The cartoon controversy does not have enough lasting importance and significance to be included in the history section.AlexanderPar 18:53, 13 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You both acting as meatpuppets. You have not even participated in discussion and making reverts. Summary is fine. It reflects third party opinion. I quote it again "If the same event pops up in a number of articles it shows that we need a separate article about the event. Controversy over Anti-Azerbaijani cartoons or something. Then all the articles could use only a short phrase linking to the controversy article or even the link in the See also section."--Dacy69 19:02, 13 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you are not agree with that we can resort to Arbitration since I see no further point in mediation. You keep reverting.--Dacy69 19:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
you have a very very strong POV in this issue and even don't try to hide it at all. I will not accept "you" summarizing this RfC, ask an admin like Alex or Khoikhoi to do that, I will be OK with that. --Pejman47 19:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dacy69, stop threatening people with Wiki retaliation, Pejman, he also threatened retaliation if I insisted on having a picture in the cartoon article.Hajji Piruz 19:35, 13 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Don't mislead people. You are inserting unrelated picture with your own POV comment. I offer to insert picture of demonstration which is of prime improtance. This is called 'balance'. And pls. use relevant talkpage, don't spread it here.--Dacy69 19:43, 13 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dacy69, please refrain from making baseless accusations, my views are mine, and mine alone. History section is for historical events, not every strike or demonstration that has taken place in a region. AlexanderPar 19:39, 13 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I haven't seen you around during the discussion. You just quickly came after edit and Pejman revert. History section should reflect important events. I see we can't agree on its importance. But third party mediator clearly stated his view - I quoted it above. So, you don't agree with that either. So, I propose Arbitration, and for some reason Hajji Piruz call it retaliation. ?...--Dacy69 19:50, 13 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear Dacy, do you think the history page of Azerbaijan republic needs a new section about the human right reports about Talesh and/or Kurds or about the Nardaran clashes?! I can't understand what's the reason to place all of these recent events on this history page? More than that , your idea about doubting "degree of integration of Azerbaijanis in Iranian society" is not a part of your source (Karl Rahder's) text- Although that source itself is a personal view! -and adding your personal point of view to the text is out of editorial ethics! Please keep your false idea of comparing Iranian Azeri relations to other Iranians to Azeri-Russian relations for yourself! We (Iranian Azeri's) don't think alike you.YULDASH: MONI KI YAZDON TARXDAN HESH DAXLI VAR?--Alborz Fallah 14:56, 14 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear Alborz, regarding your comment to Dacy69. I do think human rights are a global issue which should be reflected on Wiki pages, regardless of country. And if you believe there is an abuse of ethnic rights of Kurds, Talysh or others in Republic of Azerbaijan, despite Council of Europe, UN, State Department, or PACE reports to the contrary, you're welcome to present those. Also, according to your comment, we should discard every single source from any article, and in fact, just blank the pages, because every word contains author's personal point. Also, in the literary Azerbaijani language your comment above is written as: "Yoldash, bunlari ki yazdin, hech tarixe daxli var"? or even more properly "Yoldash, yazdighinin hech tarixe aidiyyeti var mi?". I believe the difference should convince you enough, as Iranian Azeri, that there is an ongoing eradication of literary Azerbaijani language in Iran, and this has nothing to do with politics. Atabek 13:31, 15 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It appears I need to discuss it again! Comparison does not necessarily means that I'm about to do so. That means when it is unacceptable to use inappropriate data here, that is the same everywhere, but both you and Dacy take it as I want to use human right problems in Az Republic as retaliation!
about literary Azerbaijani language , although that is not relevant to the discussion , that's a new language(in written form) and it's written literature is not so sophisticated , then I prefer not to pay so much tribute to that
. --Alborz Fallah 18:54, 15 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You can do whatever you feel appropriate on other pages. I just take note your comment about HR in Rep. of Azerbaijan - this is clearly battlegorund approach and definitely will be taken into account. I put no personal view here. All is sourced.And you don't speak for people. here there is not room for political statement.--Dacy69 15:35, 14 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
But YOU are the person who inserts his personal view in the Karl Rahder's article! Please show me where is this sentence "degree of integration of Azerbaijanis in Iranian society" in the text ?! and please don't misinterpret about that "battleground" idea! that was only a comparison for you to get the idea (not to use humanright articles in history section ). --Alborz Fallah 10:28, 15 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

old source[edit]

Atabek please use modern references or put it in a history section on 1916 (world war I when Iran was invaded by Ottomons/Russians) and theere was a lot of anarchy in Iran. Right now there has been much migration into and out of Azerbaijan and major Persian/Azeri cities have Persian/Azeri populations but the ethnic composition is taken care of under people and says the same thing as the 1916 source. But given that the country was in anarchy in 1914-1922..the use of the word "nominal" makes sense in the context of that period (and of course not under composition of people). Right now though, there is nothing "nominal" about Azerbaijan as a region of Iran given the same anarchy does not exist and there is a central government. Actually from the begining of the 20th century, the subsequent Russian/English/Ottomon invasions, and Ottomon/Russian invasions between 1910-1922.., there was a lot of anarchy. But 1916 sources are obsolete with regards to contemporary events. For examples the countries name is not "Persia" anymore but "Iran". Thanks. --alidoostzadeh 08:32, 14 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ali, the book was published actually in 2000 with contributions of Ara Sarafian. But of course, since the old quote of Arnold J. Toynbee applies to historical context of Azerbaijan, it could be moved to history section, can't it? I think a quote pertaining to demographic history of Iranian Azerbaijan from such a prominent historian would be relevant on this page. Atabek 11:10, 14 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Atabek I think the demographic says the same thing although even in that section an up to date source should be used or else someone might use say 1000 A.D. or something which is historical. But the context of Ottomon/Russian interference needs its own subsection in the history section or an article in the long run..--alidoostzadeh 22:46, 14 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Persian Azarbaijan ?[edit]

The term "Persian Azarbaijan" listed in this article, has not been used by any relaiable source. The google search yilds 218 results in the web, but at close look at these links it is clear that most of these are the copies for the Wikiperdia. --Mehrdad 18:39, 4 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

check google books.[3][4] most of them valid academic sources. I would say the article is more historical. I took out the borders section since it is not an official region and since there is no definite border for what constitutes "Azerbaijan" in Iran and authors /politicians of all sorts might define it definitely. It is in the geography section already. (One guy I know thinks it is east azerbaijan province and another guy on the internet thinks it is half of Iran). --alidoostzadeh 00:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ali, Thanks for pointing to the Google book search, there result is sure different and much more academic. So let’s accept that term Persian Azerbaijan has indeed been used, in rare occasion, when the Anglo American world referred to Iran as Persia.

As for the borders of Azerbaijan I believe it is quite odd to deny that Azerbaijan borders with Turkey, regardless of any parts of history in last 6 or seven century.

Incidentally one of the links from your suggested search result the Diplomatic History of Persia, 1917-1923: Anglo-Russian Power Politics in Iran - Page 244 by Nasrollah Saifpour Fatemi, describe the border as " Azerbaijan, the northwest province of Persia, lies snug against the Turkish and Russian borders." . Considering the time frame of the books subject being 1917-1923 there is no mention of Iraq.

I could not help to notice that you've added "historical" in the top sentence of the article [5]. Many including me would like to know, what makes you to assume this article is about historical Azerbaijan? . If so then the section under the heading of "geography: would be meaning less, as we have to deal with the changing political geography for different historical times! This article is as much about present Azerbaijan region within Iran as it is about historical, and geographical Azerbaijan, with its ethnopolitical and geopolitical distinctions. Please refer to the text under the heading as geography. --Mehrdad 10:20, 6 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are welcome. But I would like to point out that it is not rare occasion. Persian Azerbaijan gets more hits than "south Azerbaijan" in academic books. Many sources in google book actually dispute that latter name but never-mind, that issue has its own article. There are books from 2006 in google books thats use the term Persian Azerbaijan and Britannica 2005 uses it[6]. But we do not have a region named Persian Azerbaijan/Iranian Azerbaijan on the world map as an official region. Thus its boundaries are not certain and are vague (much like Kurdistan is a term used in Academia but its boundaries are vague). As per borders, since there is no official region named Azerbaijan, then borders are not relevant with this regard. In 1917-1923 there was a province named Azerbaijan just like there was a province named Arak (which is the historical Arak-e-Ajam not to be confused with modern Arak) and we can mention that in its history section. Thus defining boundaries for non-official region is emotional and more in the territory of OR. If we are using an ethnic criteria then this map might be legitimate as well [7] (note I do not consider these ethnics maps legitimate but I am saying that in Encyclopedia we can not define a border for a non-official region based on ethnic criteria) or this source[8]. Also there are other groups in Iranian Azerbaijan but less so than Kurds and Azeris. Thus the issue is much like Khorasan which is a historical region but if we are talking about modern day politics, then it is south, Razavi and north Khorasan. There is no Khorasan bordering Afghanistan. It is these provinces currently bordering Afghanistan. If it is a geographical region, in all actuality, majority of historical sources distinguish between Zanjan and historical Azerbaijan proper (West, East, Ardabil) (See Ibn Hawqal, Fotuh al-Buldan and etc.). For example Britannica 2005 does not include Zanjan in "Iranian Azerbaijan". But if we are talking about ethnic regions and naming areas where Azerbaijanis live, then there are many non-Turkic speakers live in Azerbaijan(even today and if we are to include West Azerbaijan which recent maps show heavily Kurdish) and also there are Armenians, Talysh, Persian/Tats, Assyrians and etc and there are many Azerbaijanis in Tehran (more so than Tabriz or even Baku or any other city in the world). The issue is complicated (if you are defining a modern ethnic region) but for Wikipedia it should not be. The article "Iranian Azeris" deals with ethnic Azeris and thus we should not duplicate two articles in Wikipedia as per clear Wikipedia Guidelines. But the name Aturpatakan (Azerbaijan)/Azerbaijan pre-dates the ethnonym "Azerbaijani" by about 2200 years and thus deserve a separate article (I do not mean ancient "Azari" which was the pre-Turkic language and has been sourced in 8th-16th century) as a historical region within Iran. There needs to be an article on the historical region (covering Babak, Rustam Farrokh, Atropatene, Ilkhanids, Rawwadid, Turkmens all the way down to the modern era) and one on Iranian Azerbaijani people. Thus the article Iranian Azeris should deal with ethnic Azeris(as it does currently) and there should be an article on the history of Iranian Azerbaijan. There is a need for a history article on Iranian Azerbaijan which is this article since there is an an article on ethnic Iranian Azeris. As per borders (geography) in its current form, I am inclined to put what Britannica says since it seems to be a non-political source. But I'll await feedback since it is not an important issue. More important is to have an article on the history of Iranian Azerbaijan from the ancient era till the modern era.(Much like the Encyclopedia of Islam entry on Azerbaijan) --alidoostzadeh 15:51, 6 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why Nothing About Conflicts?![edit]

I saw that articles about Iranian Kurdistan or Turkish Kurdistan also include texts about conflicts that those regions have witnessed with the central government. These are some serious issues. Why nothing about the 2006 protests have been written? Many things could have been written but it seems that some Iranians try extremely hard to censor these important issues. I am not a Wiki editor so please excuse me for not knowing much aboiut how things are done or edited. I just noticed that this article had this serious short-come. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:51, 20 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. Yes I noticed too. I am wiki editor but most of the time my adding things are censored. However, I will continue my effort. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:14, 11 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In the event that someone is familiar with the history of the above-mentioned epic, it would be relevant to introduce some appropriate details into the pertinent Wikipedia entry (i.e. here: "Epic of Köroğlu"). The river Aras is central to this epic, and as the following remarkably beautiful stage production shows, the libretto is in Persian.

A short section of a stage production of Köroğlu, an opera by Uzeyir Hajibeyov, YouTube: [9] (10 min 55 sec).

With kind regards, --BF 02:16, 28 July 2008 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Uzeyir and Koor-Oghlou epics[edit]

Till the 1950s. Koroghlu epics existed as oral dastan tradition and narrated by the Ashoogs (tanbour players). In 1950s Samad Vurghoun, a poet and ashoog wrote it down for the first time. Of course, earlier, in 1930s Uzeyir Hajibayov set down a libretto using this epic. But those are variouse genres. Uzeyir was in close touch with Mir Jafar Baghirov, who transfered to him Stalin's orders and wishs. Uzeyir received an order to create specific "Azerbaijani" cultur, differing it from Iranian cultur. Stalin (who did friendship with Mammad Amin Rasoulzadeh once), was about creating pretext for his passions on Irani Azerbaijan. So on, Uzeyir was forced to ignore the Iranian background in local culture and wrote manuals describing how to convert the Persian music into the " Azerbaijan" music. However he knew that there is not any sort of Azerbaijani music being apart from Iranian. Koroghlu epic has plenty of versions. I have forgotten the name of te book (the manual), but I think that is available and findable. Koroghlu epics seems to be about a straggle of a Kurdish or Zaza people against the Seljuk or Ottoman governors. Some sort of epics narrated also amongst the Kurds, Afgans and Turkmens. Compare with Dastan-e Dada Qorqoud. Ashoogs (naggals) mixed the turkic stori with the classical Greek-Byzantine miths. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arkankipcak (talkcontribs) 12:11, 28 July 2008 (UTC) Samed Vourghoun's prose version of Koroghlu (exist film) mentioned Darband (which???) but not the Aras river. The prose book " Koroghlou" is available in Az.Pepublic. Koroghlu epic is is a collection of variouse stories. That is fiction that faced changes and developed, but not reliable source to research the Anatolian antropology. The main mistake is that Koroghlu percepted as hero-ashoog. That is misunderstood. Narrators were ashoogs and poets and Koroghlou's speech were narrated being accompanied with tanbour. That does not mean that he was a poet and musician himself. --Arkankipcak (talk) 11:55, 29 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Traditionally Uzeir Hajibayov used Iranian Radif music to create his operas or other music pieces. You can visit Parissa's web page to compare Uzeyir,s Laayla va Majnoun music with old Iranian tasnifs. Koroghlu opera was produced by Uzeir's imagination and is a fiction. Koroghlu epic is also a fiction. Hard to dig out. Agree with Arkankipcak. --Faikpro (talk) 15:26, 29 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Azari or Azerbaijani?[edit]

Azari-iranian,azerbaijani-turkic nation. --Azturkk (talk) 16:51, 9 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I believe Azerbaijani is proper name for citizens of republic of Azerbaijan. The terms Azeri is more accurate for Iranians since they have been called by that name in ancient times up to this day. It implies continuity of history of Azeri people in Iran and shows their legitimate ownership over that part of the country (rather than being descendands of some foreign immigrants)-- (talk) 00:32, 21 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Application of Flag and Maps[edit]

The English version of this article is edited and maintained very well, however its related versions in other languages, especially in Spanish, Catalan, Portuguese, Russian and Azerbaijani include Flags and Maps of so called “SOUTH AZERBIJAN”.

The flag and the maps are explicitly violation of Iran’s territorial integrity, science the Flag is just a flag of separatist group and not “Persian Azerbaijan” and the Map is just similar to separatist group territorial clams over Iranian territories.

So, I would appreciate if you take some action about the application of vague Flag and Maps in Spanish, Catalan, Portuguese, and Russian and Azeri versions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alireza824 (talkcontribs) 18:14, 1 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

the map shows northwest provinces of iran but this article is not about northwest iran, is it? so why is there no map called azerbaijan? this is all unprecise and misguiding. you want to explain azerbaijan (iran) or south azerbaijan but you do not show a map of azerbaijan (iran) or south azerbaijan. i do not know how to add a picture, but i will try to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:28, 6 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments on Iranian Azarbaijan[edit]

Date: June 10, 2009

Subject: Comments on Iranian Azarbaijan

This comment is on the discussion which is focusing on the appropriate spelling of the name of provinces located in the northwestern part of Iran, namely, East and West “Azarbaijan.” Perhaps I am entering the discussion in the middle or some of the issues may have been addressed. However, I feel that there are issues that must be reconsidered before finalizing the spelling of the name.

1. If the issue is “a” versus “e” as it appears in “Azarbaijan” and “Azerbaijan”, respectively, the correct spelling of the name for the Iranian provinces has always been with “a”, “Azarbaijan” not “Azerbaijan”. The locals and the government use the spelling with “a”. If you find any spelling in the literature with “e” referring to the Iranian provinces, it is because of misconception of the English speaking population, writers, or media. If you ask any native Iranian to write or pronounce “Azar”, you will see the spelling with “a” and you will hear the pronunciation with “a” not “e”. See the references cited below. Please note that we have no “Azarbayjan”, the “bay” word is erroneous; it is either “Azarbaijan” or “Azarbyjan”, preferably the former. It is significant to note that these four references clearly and definitely attempt to differentiate and separate the Iranian Azarbaijan provinces from the Republic of Azerbaijan (also see the rationale in comment #2).

2. Obviously, the Iranian Azarbaijanis have some similarity with the Republic of Azerbaijan. However, we are Iranians and belong to the Iranian nation. Our culture, traditions, formal language, history, and many aspects of our social life are primarily based on and have rooted connection to the fabric of Iranian nation. The Turky language that is spoken in the Iranian Azarbaijan is influenced significantly by the Persian (Farsi) words and it is only learned in the frame work of a family structure. That is to say that there is no formal teaching or leaning of Turky language in any institutional form (not at least so far) and the formal language is Persian (Farsi) which is widely taught in schools and used in the institutional settings. Therefore, any notion that Iranians must accept or spell Azarbaijan with “e”, in the same manner as the Republic of Azerbaijan, based on the English literature or western choosing has no basis and it is false.

3. In reference to the discussion material, naming Iranian provinces as “South Azerbaijan” is absolutely misleading, erroneous, confusing, and insult to the Iranian nation. Without a doubt it will be protested by the Islamic Republic of Iran.

4. Has the Wikipedia made any attempts to consult with the Islamic Republic of Iran? The spelling issue or misconception will not go away unless the Wikipedia consults with the local entities. For example, consider the provincial capital of West Azarbaijan. Before the Islamic revolution it was called “Rezaieh” and after the revolution the Islamic Republic of Iran changed the name to “Orumiyeh.” There are significant discussions and arguments that claim the name should be spelled as “Urmia”. The government has decided to keep the spelling of “Orumiyeh” and thus many documents and maps, government or otherwise, utilizes this spelling today. Unfortunately, if you search one of these names in the literature or online, you will find variety of spelling such as “Urmia”, “Orumia”, “Urumia”, “Orumih”, “Urumiyeh”, and so on. So, the argument goes on and so is the confusion.

In conclusion, I think the Wikipedia initiative of researching for an appropriate spelling is commendable and it is the right thing to do in providing accurate information to the public as much as possible. However, I do not believe that the Wikipedia should solely rely on the Western/English literature, documents, any other country, or the media in coming up to a logical conclusion. Some of the names, spellings, and geographical segmentations are created and conceived by the colonialists without any respect and participation of the local people and entities. For example, consider the label of “Middle East”, which has caused unnecessary pain and complications for many immigrants coming to the US. We are Iranians first and our continent is Asia; we should not be labeled as the Middle Easterners.

I hope that this discussion is helpful and will be considered in choosing the right spelling as discussed above. Yashajan (talk) 20:55, 10 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I strongly agree. The spelling for azAris from Iran has always been with an "a", why is everyone deciding to spell it with an "e" all of a sudden? Immakingthisaccounttohidemyipaddress (talk) 06:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]


The section "Modern period" is full of misprints. (talk) 10:12, 25 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question with regard to Kurdish language to Pournick.[edit]

Pournick why did you delete the Kurdish name? Kurdish is largely spoken in West Azerbaijan and is in fact next to Azeri and Talysh is another language native to Iranian Azerbaijan. Exclusion of Kurds based on ethnic and religious grounds is called discrimination and is very racist. Why did you do that?--Babakexorramdin (talk) 11:28, 13 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The answer is in my talk page regardsPournick (talk) 12:42, 13 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


The Ardabil link in Geography is wrong - it links to the city, as opposed to the province. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:28, 29 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Page Move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 21:25, 30 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Azerbaijan (Iran)Azerbaijan — The name Azerbaijan belongs to the Iranian region. We have the article History of the name Azerbaijan in which the detailed aspects of the name Azerbaijan are explained. If more information is needed, I am ready to discuss in more details. Aliwiki (talk) 18:57, 23 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your comment. There are two entities, with same name. One is a region and one is a country. Obviously Google gives more result for a country rather than a region. To have a better idea, see results for Macedonia which has a similar situation.--Aliwiki (talk) 23:21, 23 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Note that we call the two articles on present Macedonian political entities Republic of Macedonia and Macedonia (Greece). Why should this be different? Azerbaijan "belongs" to both of them. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:26, 23 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In the case of Macedonia, there is an ongoing naming dispute as to what the country should be called. Many countries and international organisations, including the United Nations and European Union, follow the Greek position in referring to the country exclusively as the "former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia". The same is not the case with Azerbaijan, where the country is, as far as I know, universally recognised under that name. Please note I have no personal opinion on this matter, I simply believe that we should follow reliable sources rather than judge the matter ourselves. The Celestial City (talk) 00:06, 24 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To Pmanderso: The difference is that the Republic of Macedonia is part of the historical Macedonia region (See here); But Republic of Azerbaijan is part of historical regions of Arran, and Shirvan, not part of historical region of Azerbaijan.
To The Celestial City, I didn't accuse you to any personal opinion and if you understood anything about this in my previous comment, it's my duty to apologize. Similar to the Macedonia naming dispute, we have the article History of the name Azerbaijan which is strongly supported by over 60 reliable Academic references. That Macedonia's case suffers a political conflict between Greece and the Republic, but there isn't political conflict between Iran and the republic of Azerbaijan is not what I am seeking in this move proposal. I didn't propose to move the country to Republic of Azerbaijan, Former republic... or similar names. My proposal is to have 1.Azerbaijan and 2. Azerbaijan (country).--Aliwiki (talk) 10:13, 24 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose deleting the country article and replacing it with this article is wrong. Why do you want to delete the country article? The country exists. (talk) 05:21, 24 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please review the discussion before making such comment. There is no deletion.--Aliwiki (talk) 10:20, 24 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This IP has less than 100 edits
    • Comment you have not even proposed to move the country article, therefore you want to delete it. Where have you said you wanted to rename the country article in your rationale? (talk) 06:30, 26 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose. The country is a primary meaning of the word, the province is very obscure for the general reader outside of Iran. There's no ongoing naming dispute or anything like that. And if the word Azerbaijan would lead to the article about province, it would be very confusing, as the vast majority of those who search for Azerbaijan search for the country, not Iranian region. Plus, this was discussed by the community a number of times, see archives. It should be the way it is now. Grandmaster 09:12, 24 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just a note: The country of Macedonia is also a primary meaning. Or a better example could be China; People's Republic of China is the primary meaning and the Republic of China is the secondary.--Aliwiki (talk) 10:13, 24 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose This is a claim that the Republic of Azerbaijan should not be called Azerbaijan, since it is not historically Azeri. This is the same claim the Greeks make about the Republic of Macedonia, and it should not be the basis of article titles in either case; we title on the basis of what geographic entities actually are called (in English). So I would oppose this even if I believed the underlying claim, but I do not: Baku was considered to lie in (Russian) Azerbaijan in the nineteenth century. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:43, 24 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose -- The Republic of Azerbaijan is an independent republic. No doubt the adjacent Iranian province is the part of anceint Azerbaijan that the Russians did not conquer in the 19th century. The article under discussion might possibly be renamed Azerbaijan (Iranian Province) or Azerbaijan, Iran, but it would be wholly inappropriate to allow Iranian expansionism to claim the primary name for its region. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:47, 26 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment--Nowadays for ordinary reader of English Wikipedia , word Azerbaijan points mainly to the country and not the Iranian Province ; but I'm asking what about all historical texts that has been used in Wikipedia that use the name Azerbaijan - that only mean the Iranian province and not the Arran/Shirvan (new AZ republic ) region - ?Without disambiguation , understanding the historical texts will be impossible . For comment of PMAnderson , "we title on the basis of what geographic entities actually are called (in English)" ; the example of Georgia is a good one : 90% of English-language readers only know it as a U.S. state but other historical and non-historical usages of that name makes us NOT TO USE the dominant English-language reader's understanding as the main article , and to use a disambiguation page .So same as Georgia (country) and Georgia (U.S. state) , I think it is reasonable to use Azerbaijan (country) and Azerbaijan (Iran) without redirection of Azerbaijan to country , but to disambiguation page --Alborz Fallah (talk) 07:43, 29 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Your idea is good. But I don't know is there any way to change the request or not, or should we start a new request on the current disambiguation page. I will ask an admin about this.--Aliwiki (talk) 14:21, 30 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Azerbaijan (Iran) in Azerbaijani language[edit]

The name of "Azerbaijan (Iran)" in "Azerbaijani language" is ""Cənubi Azərbaycan" / گونئی آزربایجان.

Attentin to "Cənubi Azərbaycan" and "گونئی آزربایجان" --Ebrahimi-amir (talk) 07:12, 10 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The official name in Farsi was added (آذربایجان). The name in Azerbaicani language iz not "آذربایجان". It is "گونئی آزربایجان / Cənubi Azərbaycan".--Ebrahimi-amir (talk) 04:16, 11 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Some secessionist and/or ultra nationalistic movement suggested using South Azerbaijan -with a new form of using ز instead ذ - but it is not neither mainstream idea nor dominant . If you want to show that form is correct , please cite a source (not the web!) --Alborz Fallah (talk) 08:57, 11 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

1- You deleted the both of "گونئی آزربایجان / Cənubi Azərbaycan". You shoul show refrence for "mainstream idea" in Azerbaijani language that use "آذربایجان" for "Azerbaijan (Iran)".

2- Both of ""گونئی آزربایجان" " and "گونئی آذربایجان" used in Ərəbic script, that used in Soth Azerbaijan. And we can use both of them in thise article.

3- "گونئی آزربایجان / گونئی آذربایجان" is used a lat of Soth Azerbaijanı web:

"GünAz TV" (Güney Azərbaycan Televiziası), "GAMOH" (Güney Azərbaycan Milli Oyanış Hərəkatı), GAİP (Güney Azərbaycan İstsqlal Partıyası), Güney Azərbaycan Öyrənci Hərəkatı , GAQP (Güney Azərbaycan Qurtuluş Patiyası), SANANEWS (Soth Azerbaijan News Agency),... --Ebrahimi-amir (talk) 11:28, 11 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Other sourses for "گونئی آزربایجان / Güney Azərbaycan":

1- Books that use "Güney Azerbaycan"

2- Güney Azərbaycan

3- Güney Azerbaycan

And you don't show any refrence for "mainstream idea" in Azerbaijani language that use "آذربایجان" for "Azerbaijan (Iran)". --Ebrahimi-amir (talk) 04:46, 16 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The name used is for the languages spoken within Iran, which is the South Azeri dialect written in the modified Arabic alphabet. Thus, it is inconsequential how the language/alphabet of another country uses such a term. For example, if the term Iran was used different in say the Persian of Afghanistan, it is inconsequential for an article on Iran. In Iran no one writes: "Güney" with such an alphabet in the Azeri publications there (say newspapers). Because first of all, they use the modified Arabic alphabet and second, it is politically charged. Second, the same region (a good portion of it like all of Western Azerbaijan) is called by Kurdish nationalists as "Eastern Kurdistan". For example, in the Northern Federal region of Kurdish Iraq, they use East Kurdistan for all of West Azerbaijan with their own alphabet. However, this does not mean we put "Eastern Kurdistan" in say the article West Azerbaijan for Kurdish language or here. Thus what matters is mainstream and official publications within Iranian Azerbaijan, and even the term "Güney" is not used that much as the word "Jonub" is used for "South" more often then "Güney". Also, please do not edit war, given the fact that your block was just lifted by adding controversial items. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 08:08, 17 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

1- We talks about the name of "Azerbaijan (Iran)" in Azerbaijani languge. You can talk about ather article in himself talk page.

2- I shown many refrence that uesed "گونئی آزربايجان / Güney Azərbaycan" in Azerbaijani language but you don't show any refrence for "آذربايجان". Azerbaijani language and Farsi are different languges.

3- Both of Latin and Arabic scripts used in South Azerbaijan.--Ebrahimi-amir (talk) 09:57, 17 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  • The name is about local languages in the country of Iran which is the South Azeri language, which uses Arabic alphabet and orthography. In Iran, no book or newspapers is published in the orthography you have used. Local names are used from local languages. And you have yet to establish that the name you have proposed is common in Iran. It is not, because officially the name is Azerbaijan and local newspapers/books use Azerbaijan or similar to Ostan-e Azerbaijan, and not Guney.
  • The references you brought have nothing to do with Iran which is the concern of the article. Because local names in a country must come from texts from that country, not outside the country.
  • The name is about local languages which is the South Azeri language, which uses Arabic alphabet, different phonetics and orthography. The local language spoken in Iran, not in any other 3rd country which is of no concern (hence your google books results coming outside of Iran have no relavence).
  • The term "South Azerbaijan" is a modern invention which did not exist prior to the USSR and many sources have considered it nonneutral. Only fringe and not main stream sources in Iran (which is what is important relative to this article) might use it. For example, Shahriyaar always has used Qafqaaz for Caucasus Azerbaijan, and "Azerbaijan" (not Guney Azerbaijan) for Iran. Your idea is the same as writing in Persian: "Azerbaijan-e Tarixi o Asli" (the real and historic Azerbaijan) in Persian, just because some sources use such a term (E. Reza, Varjavand, etc.). Or writing "Eastern Kurdistan" for parts of the region because Kurdish sources in Iraq use it.
  • Note you also said that Jews/Europeans make history for Iran and Turks have 7000 years history... this is not the way to edit wikipedia. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 14:12, 17 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

1- We talk about the "Azerbaijan (Iran)" in the "Azerbaijani language".

2- Both of Latin and Arabic alphabet are used in "Azerbaijani language" and in South Azerbaijan.

3- Azerbaijani people are one people who live in several countries and "Azerbaijani language" is common language in South and North Azerbaijan. And they have common wikipedia. [10]

4- Sources mentioned earlier, show that "Güney Azərbaycan / گونئی آزربایجان" used in South Azerbaijan.

5- Use the term "South Azerbaijan" in Iran can be heavy consequences. For example Reza Baraheni to use the term "قاپدی قاشدی /Minibus" in one of his works to be imprisoned. Following the publication of "Kasravi and Azeri hypothesis" (Dr.Sediq)large charges to Dr.Sediq is entered.Here is Iran

Also, many people for apply to teach in their mother tongue in schools are in prisons. "Said Metinpur" and see [11]

6- I think the resources are enough rational and you do not have any source for your say--Ebrahimi-amir (talk) 19:53, 19 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Again you just repeated the same thing.

  • Point 1 and 2: Many sources mention in Persian that Azerbaijan is the real Azerbaijan, but one uses official names. The Azerbaijani language in Iran is South Azeri and is overwhelmingly written in Arabic script. It has its own phonetics, vocabulary and etc. One does not use Australian English for articles in America.
  • Point 3: That is irrelavent, since common wikipedia is not a source for wikipedia.
  • Point 4: Again the official and common name used in Iran is Azerbaijan. You are bringing a fringe name.
  • Point 5: Reza Beraheni was imprisoned for political activities, not because of usage of term. Also that still does not establish any currency, just because Reza Beraheni used it. Also he did not, as Reza Beraheni has written all his work in Persian, and what Reza Beraheni names it, is not the official or common usage. In each country, one puts the official and common usage name.
  • Point 6: The resources you brought were some weblogs and some sources from the republic of Azerbaijan. Nothing relavent to this article. The name you proposed is not used in Iran, because in Iran, the Azeri script is written in Arabic alphabet. Shahriyar who wrote in Azeri (unlike Beraheni) differntiates between Azerbaijan and Qafqaaz.. He has many poets about "Azerbaijan". So again, in Iran, one uses the Azeri language in Iran written in Arabic script. Just like in America, one does not use Australian English. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 13:40, 20 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

1- Reza Baraheni to use the term "قاپدی قاشدی /Minibus" in one of his works to be imprisoned."در اتاق تمشیت پای مرا کابل می‌زدند…از من بازجویی دسته‌جمعی کردند و مدام به من می‌گفتند که تو چون کلمه قاپدی- قاچدی را که مردم تبریز روی مینی‌بوس گذاشته بودند، در این مقاله به کاربرده‌ای «پس تو می‌خواهی…پیشه‌وری بشوی!»…" هم‌میهن غزئتی: گفت و گو با رضا براهنی؛نویسندگی سرنوشتِ من است2 - ادامه گفتگو با رضا براهنی گفت‌وگوی اختصاصی هم‌میهن با دکتر رضا براهنی- نویسنده، شاعر و منتقد[]. Then in that time Shahriyar couldn't use "South Azerbaijan".

2- This websites "GünAz TV" (Güney Azərbaycan Televiziası), "GAMOH" (Güney Azərbaycan Milli Oyanış Hərəkatı), GAİP (Güney Azərbaycan İstsqlal Partıyası), Güney Azərbaycan Öyrənci Hərəkatı , GAQP (Güney Azərbaycan Qurtuluş Patiyası), SANANEWS (Soth Azerbaijan News Agency),... are writen by South Azerbaijanes people. Not North Azerbaijanes.

3- "Varliq" the famous South Azerbaini magnazine use both of Latin and Arabic sript.

4- Shahriyar lived in several years ago but we lives in NOW. And we should use recent sources.

5- Persian government is forced other nations to use Farsi. In the government of "Azerbaijan People's Government" Azerbaijani language was official in South Azerbaijan. --Ebrahimi-amir (talk) 04:22, 25 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia is not a soapbox : WP:SOAPBOX. Reza Baraheni is a known ethno-centric leftist writer that have especial points of views . All of the websites that you mentioned are propaganda websites that are Baku based and they reflect the opinion of extremist separatist groups that are not known to be the majority . Varliq in Iranian Azarbaijan was a magazine that had a strong ties with Pan Turkic circles , so it is not surprising in using a script that is acceptable to them . About one part of Iranian nation forcing other parts to use a language , that is a false information and I think continuing such manner may cause a second edit block for you . Saq Olasan , --Alborz Fallah (talk) 06:24, 25 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You sey "Reza Baraheni is a known ethno-centric leftist writer..." and "Varliq in Iranian Azarbaijan was a magazine that had a strong ties with Pan Turkic circles...". It's again WP:PA and WP:CIVIL. Please write about subject not about others. You should show source about your clime. --Ebrahimi-amir (talk) 08:57, 25 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

According to WP:NPA#WHATIS , mentioning political views of Baraheni and Varliq is not a personal attack and is not against civility , and many may consider that political views as their positive points , but using the POV of especial groups in Wikipedia as the majority or main stream view is not acceptable . By itself , being Leftist and / or separatist does not have positive or negative meaning , but that means they can't be considered as referencing source . I can express my opinion about the other sources and that is not prohibited.--Alborz Fallah (talk) 15:00, 25 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

To Ebrahimi Amir:

  • Please note the rules of Wikipedia, WP:NPA is about users and not about criticsm of unreliable authors (describing their unreliability is not a personal attack).
  • First the website you showed about Berahani is in Persian not latin Alphabet script, and it is weblog. So it is not a usable source and it does not have your latin alphabet. Weblogs are not usable sources.
  • Second Braheani (I did not see where he used the latin alphabet with that term) does not set the standard for Wikipedia. See WP:RS and WP:OR.
  • Third I have seen online editions of Varliq and they are not in Latin script. Also Varliq is a magazine and a fringe soucre, but you need to show an exact article in Latins script (with your spelling) that they use the term. You have failted to do so, but even if you do, it is a fringe source WP:FRINGE.
  • Fourth standard academic texts clearly state that Arabic alphabet is used in Iran, not "both". If Latin/Cyrilic is used it is 1% relative to 99%, so it has no weight in Wikipedia. Fact is in Iran related articles, it is not used and the dialect in Iran is South Azeri which uses Arabic script. Wikipedia is not a place for nationalism.
  • Pishevari's government is 1 year tenure and they did not use Latin alphabet either.
  • Shahriyar is still more popular than fringe sources, and you have no source he was forced.
  • The standard in Iran is Arabic alphabet and thats it. Any other alphabet is not used by majority of Iranians and has no place in Wikipedia artcles about Iran,
  • One can criticize viewpoints of authors, and Alborz is totally right about Berhanei/Varligh are fringe and not reliable separatis sources.
  • Please stop pushing fringe weblogs/websites with no academic value. You need reliable sources not weblogs. Also Wikipedia maintains neutrality..else Just because Parviz Varjavand calls it "Azerbaijan-e Vaghei, Azerbaijan-e Tarixi" (the latter term being used in Persian a lot), it does not mean it should be there in Persian. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 03:02, 27 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

To Khodabandeh14 and Alborz Fallah:

It seems you're looking for a biased point.

1-We talk about South Azerbaijan name in Azerbaijani languge. You say that Shahriyar used Qafqaz for North Azerbaijan! But you should show reference that Shahriyar or other South Azerbaijani autors used/use "آذربایجان" for South Azerbaijan. Notice that "آذربایجان" is used for great Azerbaijan (South and North Azerbaijan toghether).

2- Others accuse the "Pan" being without any evidence is a type of attack.

3- Reference shown that; Reza Baraheni to use the term "قاپدی قاشدی /Minibus" in one of his works to be imprisoned.

4- "Varliq" used latin script:" Аrsak : Tutarlı Cavab, Dоktоr Cavanşir Vəkilоv p.104" & “Koroğlu” Eposunun Poеtik Dili, X. B. Bəşirli, filologiya Elmləri Namzədi P.106" & Şirvаndа Аşiq Sənəti, Ağalar Mirzə p.113" (Varliq n.136) "Sərf və Nəhv Bir-birindən Ayrı Deyil, İbrahim Rafraf p.106" (n.130) and...

That showes both of Arabic and Latin script are used in South Azerbaijan.

5- Professor Zehtabi used "جنوبی آذربایجاندا تاریخ علمینه بیرباخیش" in "ایران تورکلرینین اسکی تاریخی" book (Volume I - p.14)

6- Pishevari's government did not use Latin alphabet either because Pishevari's government was in 1946 and Latin script was used 1990 decade.

7-I mentioned several related sources for my clime, but you don't show any source for your claim. --Ebrahimi-amir (talk) 19:34, 31 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • First again, it seems you do not understand Wikipedia rules. Wikipedia uses common names used in the country and the common alphabet used in the country. If Latin alphabet was chosen for the language in the republic of Azerbaijan (which is considered a different dialect and macro-language than South Azeri) in 1990, then it has no bearing on Iran. So there is no discussion here as we are talking about Iran, which not in 1990, but never has chosen the latin alphabet.
  • Jamie Stokes, "Encyclopaedia of the Peoples of Africa and Middle East, Volume 1", Infobase Publishing, 2009. pg 79 "Although Russian- influenced Azeris have used both the Cyrillic and the Roman alphabets, in Iran the Azeri language has always been written in a version of the Arabic script."
  • Several minor letters in Varliq do not count per WP:weight.
  • Accusation of pan is not an attack it is statement about the biase of the source.
  • Zehtabi who considers Elamites, Sumerians and Medes as Turks is an unscholarly source and I invite you to try to change the articles such as Elamites, Sumerians and Medes with his psuedo-scientific theories so that admins become aware.
  • Well if Latin got accepted in 1990, it never got accepted in Iran which is what this article is about.
  • Your references are websites/weblogs which have no weight in Wikipedia.. Shahriyar which you mentioned never wrote "Guney Azerbaijan" in Latin or in Persian or Turkish or any other language. And yes when he references Azerbaijan, he references historical Azerbaijan. You can search the word Qafqaz and Azerbaijan.. For example his poem about Ferqeh:

روز جانبازيست اي بيچاره آذربايجان سرتو باشي در ميان هرجا كه آمد پاي جان اي بلاگردان ايران سينه زخمي به پيش تير باران بلا باز از تو مي جويد نشان So he is calling Azerbaijan as the head of Iran, but the Caucasus did not belong to Iran at all..

  • However, Wikipedia does not work but what Beraheni, Shahriyar, Varliq or some websites use. Wikipedia works with standard and official terms used in the country.
  • Your WP:OR on why Shahriyar did not write "South" or "North", has no weight in Wikipedia. The fact is that he never used "Guney".. but he has used Qafqaz as opposed to Azerbaijan. Most importantly, as shown by netural sources, Arabic alphabet is used in Iran for the South Azeri dialect, so if a country since 1990 has used Latin alphabet, it does not really have any relationship to Iran. Maybe tommorow they will choose Cyrillic or Arabic or etc., but this article is about Iran and how the scripts in Iran are used.--Khodabandeh14 (talk) 02:44, 1 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

1- Yes! Wikipedia uses "Non-neutral but common names" WP:POVTITLE. And common names is used in common places. I show "گونئی آزربایجان / جنوبی آزربايجان / Güney Azərbaycan" is used in South Azerbaijan commonly. But you can't show it.

2- Azerbaijani people have common languge, culture, ethnic identity and... . Change Azerbaijani languge to the Latin alphabet has led to used this script in South Azerbaijan.

3-You use poetry of Shahriyar is Farsi not Azerbaijani.

4- The term "South Azerbaijan" also used in Farsi source. For example "كثرت قومي و هويت ملي ايرانيان" Professor Zea Sadr (Tehran,2008, p.38)

5- Varliq, Zehtabi ... are reliable sources WP:RELIABLE. "Reliable sources may be published materials with a reliable publication process, authors who are regarded as authoritative in relation to the subject, or both."

6- Please seeWP:ORIGINAL and show reliable sources that show mainstream idea in Azerbaijani language that use "آذربایجان" for "Azerbaijan (Iran)". --Ebrahimi-amir (talk) 04:38, 1 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Again, you have no proof that is the common name. That is why you are violating WP:POVTITLE.. just couple of weblogs which has no academic value.
  • Part two of your talk is slogan. But linguistically, the dialects/languages of Iran is called Southern Azeri written in Arabic script.
  • Ziya Sadr is an exile in Toronto, and again, his article is in Farsi (same reason you criticize Shahryar).
  • Show me a text from 100 years with the word "Guney Azerbaijan" in Latin alphabet.. of course you cannot.
  • Zehtabi is definitely not WP:RELIABLE as he claims the Medes, Urartu, Parthians as Turks. Reliable means people that have serious Western academic credentials. These are nationalistic sources as are Varliq. We can put somewhere in the article that "nationalist irredentist sources call it X in Azeri".
  • WP:OR is what you have been violating and you need to show that mainstream in Azerbaijani language in Iran uses "Latin Alphabet" which you failed. I brought sources that states clearly that Arabic alphabet is used in Iran. You did not bring any source that states that non-Arabic alphabet is used frequently in Iran. I brought sources that state that Azerbaijani language in Iran has its own pecularities and linguists even use "South Azeri" for it, you again failed to bring academic sources.
  • The weblogs you brought lack WP:WEIGHT and unless you provide academic sources, where-as the sources I brought even clearly state "Latin Alphabet" is not used in Iran and Iranian Azerbaijan. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 05:54, 1 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You claim that sources are used by my aren't academic sources but they are.

Pay attention to the issues discussed and seeWP:ORIGINAL so show reliable sources that show mainstream idea in Azerbaijani language that use "آذربایجان" for "Azerbaijan (Iran)". --Ebrahimi-amir (talk) 07:11, 1 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Stop misuing policy you do not understand. I actually bring reliable sources for my assertions (see below), while WP:OR means quoting websites/weblogs and fringe sources (e.g. Zehtabi who is not taken seriously by academicians). You are the one that is changing the article, thus you need real sources. Yes Zehtabi is not an academic source as you can see, no one considers the Medes or Parthians to be Turks except nonsense sources like Zehtabi which you are pushing. It falls under WP:FRINGE. Also no where did you show anything in Varliq using "Guney Azerbaijan" in Latin alphabet, and you need to bring the actual issue, but Varliq is WP:FRINGE. SHahriyar would be more mainstream as he is not political, and again you failed to prove he used such a term.
  • On Arabic script, again we do not care if some country outside of Iran adopted a script for their language since 1990 as we are talking about South Azeri dialect which is distinguished. Tajikistan might use Cyrilic but we do not put Cyrilic in an article on Tehran. The names are supposed to reflect the local names and spellings from the country, not outside of it.
    • Jamie Stokes, "Encyclopaedia of the Peoples of Africa and Middle East, Volume 1", Infobase Publishing, 2009. pg 79 "Although Russian- influenced Azeris have used both the Cyrillic and the Roman alphabets, in Iran the Azeri language has always been written in a version of the Arabic script." (we don't care if some guy decides to publish a secret article in latin, has always should be taken as overwhelming majority, making any other spelling irrelavent).
    • "People of Western Asia, Volume 3", Marshall Cavendish, 2006. pg 124. Quote: "Iranian Azeris speak a Southern version of the Azeri language, which belongs to the Turkic family. They write in the Arabic script, while the northerners use Roman (European) letters"
  • So both of these sources rules out any latin alphabet which is not used in Iran and according to you was started in 1990!
  • On the controversial and political name..Besides Shahriyar who has never used "Jonubi,Guney..", there are many Iranian Azeris that

have criticized the name Azerbaijan for the Caucasus. These include Ahmad Kasravi who has been praised as a esteemed and erudite historian by scholars such as Minorsky. More importantly, I provide two sources that the names are controversial (which means they need to be explained), and also the neutral name is more common in Iran by everyone):

    • Michael P. Croissant, "The Armenia-Azerbaijan Conflict: Causes and Implications", Praeger/Greenwood, 1998. excerpt from pg 61: "During the Soviet-era historical revisionism and myth-building intended to denounce imperialism, the notion of a "northern" and "southern" Azerbaijan was created and propogated throughout USSR. It was charged that the "two Azerbaijanis" once united were separated artificially by conspiracy between imperial Russia and Iran".
    • Bert G. Fragner, ‘Soviet Nationalism’: An Ideological Legacy to the Independent Republics of Central Asia ’ in” in Van Schendel, Willem(Editor) . Identity Politics in Central Asia and the Muslim World: Nationalism, Ethnicity and Labour in the Twentieth Century. London , GBR: I. B. Tauris & Company, Limited, 2001. Excerpt from pg 24: "Under Soviet auspices and in accordance with Soviet nationalism, historical Azerbaijan proper was reinterpreted as 'Southern Azerbaijan', with demands for liberation and, eventually, for 're'-unification with Northern (Soviet) Azerbaijan a breathtaking manipulation. No need to point to concrete Soviet political activities in this direction, as in 1945-46 etc. The really interesting point is that in the independent former Soviet republics this typically Soviet ideological pattern has long outlasted the Soviet Union."
  • As these sources state, such a terms were created by nationalists and Soviet historical revisionionsm. There is already a sentence devoted to it in the beginning of the article as well. Such a term did not exist prior to the Soviet era and consequently, this needs to be mentioned.
  • Mainstream sources in Iran use official names as separatist type names are not used in Iran. It is simple as that. You are making an extraordinary claim and you need extraodinary sources per Wikipedia. Weblogs will not do. Furthermore, you are the one that is trying to make a change, so you need to get a concensus, but concensus cannot be achieved by using fringe weblogs and a fringe author Zehtabi. On the other hand, what is commonly and officially used in Iran (in state broadcast) is what matters here the most. Unless you bring sources that your name is the most common name (not by weblogs but actual WP:RS sources that state such a point), one will have to by default go to the official name. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 11:31, 2 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sources to DNA studies[edit]

I replace the links to two non-working sources on the page with a fact tag. Also the entire sentence claiming that Azerbaijanis (an entire ethnic group) have the same DNA as Iranians is a rather gross generalization, void of proper research facts, scholarship, and falling under WP:OR or WP:POV. Atabəy (talk) 21:27, 4 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fixed the links.The sentence can be changed , but the research and interview claims that there is a close relationship between all populations inside Iranian plateau . But overall , I agree with you about the difficulties of presenting a scientific research in popular terms . What alternative sentence is your suggestion ? --Alborz Fallah (talk) 08:08, 5 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

AlborzFallah, thank you for fixing the first link. But the second one is clearly not a WP:RS reference. So I kindly ask you to remove it, or we can go further as to why it is not. It's essentially a claim made by an Iranian student association. If you have a link to original Cambridge study making such conclusion, please, provide it. Thanks. Atabəy (talk) 14:55, 5 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do you think the sentence have to be removed or the second link , that is an interview with Dr.Bonab ?--Alborz Fallah (talk) 20:37, 5 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think the second link should be removed. The first one can stay as it is an article, but wording should be changed. How can you say that entire nation has the same DNA as some other nation? Atabəy (talk) 23:30, 5 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That is right . No one can never say such a thing ! From scientific point of view that is nonsense . In all scientific studies with normal distribution curve (Gauwith ssian distribution) , an standard element of 2 standard deviation is considered to interpret the overall view . The correct sentence can be something such as "Genetic perceptive of Iranian Azeri's resembles with other populations of Iranian plateau ". The interview is not using the scientific terminology , it is providing a simplified view for ordinary reader .--Alborz Fallah (talk) 07:26, 6 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Still the interview is not WP:RS. If there was such Cambridge study making the claim about the genetic makeup, why not provide the direct link to that study instead of recitation in a non-neutral source? Atabəy (talk) 17:58, 6 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • The Cambridge study is the first address ([12]), and it did not said the same thing that is the claim . The second address - which is an interview with the researcher of the first document - claims that the first one means the claim , although in rough and unscientific tongue . I agree about changing the sentence , what is your suggestion ?

The abstract of the Cambridge study (in non medical and popular terms) is that the genetic composition of the population of Iran , in all regions of the country , is largely the same ; the only exception is the Capital city of Tehran that is more changed (because of huge immigration from rural to urban regions). That was against the expectation of the studying group , because they first thought that the population may not be homogenous and they gave weight to the factor of immigration more than the real results so the result was not what they expected.

In the interview , Dr.Bonab puts emphasis on other surface of the study ( that is not mentioned directly in the Cambridge paper ) that the homogeneity of the population is in a high degree (and Dr Bonab interpret it as the result of the prehistoric movements of the human population , because his works with Dr Mallox mainly is focused on these topics ).

Anyway , again I agree about the point that we may not include it in the article as present sentence. What is the alternative ? --Alborz Fallah (talk) 08:04, 7 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]


There are more than one theory concerning the etymology of the word; Azerbaijan. One of which is the that 'Azer' means fire and 'Azerbaijan' the land of fire, which should be added in to the article.

Russian Azerbaijan, 1905-1920: The Shaping of a National Identity in a ... By Tadeusz Swietochowski

Azerbaijan: A Political History By Suha Bolukbasi Regards, Tugrul Irmak (talk) 15:09, 23 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well , we had a long history of debate over this topic . The detailed discussion has it's own article that is :Name of Azerbaijan. But still that article is a summary itself , and the original sophisticated article is here : Name of Azerbaijan/workpage. I think if you want to add information , first check it out if it is not mentioned in one of those articles that I mentioned . Thank you ,--Alborz Fallah (talk) 17:13, 23 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

South Azerbaijan[edit]

South Azerbaijan is another common name of Azerbaijan (Iran), it should be noted in article.

  • Rural transition in Azerbaijan by Zvi Lerman, David J. Sedik - Page 11:A Brief History of South Azerbaijan
  • Azerbaijan: a quest for identity : a short history by Charles van der Leeuw - Page 94
  • Azerbaijan Since Independence- by Svante E. Cornell Page 41
  • Iran's political, demographic, and economic vulnerabilities- by Keith Crane, Rollie Lal, Jeffrey Martini Page 54

--Orartu (talk) 18:31, 1 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

west Azarbaijan(باتي آذربايجان)[edit]

west Azarbaijan is not kurdish provice!The majority of this Province are azarbaijani turks and just the 20%of Population of this Province are Refugee kurds!in many past years and actually nowaday the most spoken language in all of this province is turkish and 90%of all the peaple in west azarbaijan both turks and kurds know turkish very well and thats because the turkish is the main language of this province! the citise like maku;khoy;chaldiran;salmas;urmia;miandoab;tekabTshahin dej;nagadeh and chaypareh are the citise which the majority(90%)of them are turk and jast 5%of them are Refugee kurds.and kurds are majority just in south of west Azarbaijan like piranshahr;mahabad;bukan & sardasht. Count in west azarbaijan as a kurdish province is realy silly!why you deny the Reality?!why you do not accept the Truth؟! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reza1374 (talkcontribs) 18:16, 4 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This statement is the most dishonest ever published. West Azerbaijan's population is in majority Kurdish. Maku, Mahabad, Chaldiran are in majority Kurdish. Only the Eastern part of this province, near the lake Orumieh is inhabited by Azeris. For instance, Maku means the mountain of the Medes and holds a great importance among Kurds. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:26, 7 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

South Azerbaijan[edit]

i guess the title should be South Azerbaijan since this section is about the south part of a whole azerbaijan and not about the azerbaijan provinces of iran. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:19, 6 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not bias at all![edit]

Gotta love the fact that this is way smaller than the Azerbaijan country page. Obvious bias RIGHT here. -- (talk) 23:27, 28 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

South Azerbaycan term[edit]

Sources claim that the South Azerbaijan term is "irredentist and politically motivated"

  • Michael P. Croissant, "The Armenia-Azerbaijan Conflict: Causes and Implications", Praeger/Greenwood, 1998.
  • Ethnic Conflict and International Security, Edited by Michael E. Brown, Princeton University Press, 1993
  • Bert G. Fragner, ‘Soviet Nationalism’: An Ideological Legacy to the Independent Republics of Central Asia ... 2001

1998, 1993 and 2001 is the date of writing this resource. These references are outdated because several of the so-called "South Azerbaijan" has been used.

  • John W. Parker, "Persian Dreams: Moscow and Tehran Since the Fall of the Shah", Published by Potomac Books, Inc., 2009
  • Brown, Cameron S. 2002 (Dec.). "Observations from Azerbaijan." Middle East Review of International Affairs: v. 6, no. 4
  • Brenda Shaffer, Borders and brethren: Iran and the challenge of Azerbaijani identity, Belfer Center Studies in International Security Series, MIT Press, 2002
  • Zvi Lerman, David Sedik, Rural Transition in Azerbaijan, Lexington Books, 2010
  • Anar Isgenderli, Realities of Azerbaijan 1917-1920, Xlibris Corporation, 2011

and etc. --Ebrahimi-amir (talk) 13:02, 8 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For citing a source , you may mention what page and what sentence is supporting your claim . How can you name a whole book as source ? And also it's customary in Wikipedia when there is an ongoing debate , the changes are postponed then please do not add your questionable change to the text until the achievement of a result .--Alborz Fallah (talk) 10:52, 10 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

--Ebrahimi-amir (talk) 15:56, 11 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In searching that books , it is important to read the terminology section that is often in the opening pages of the book :
In the book "Borders and brethren -- Brenda Shaffer" , she herself says in the opening section ( Page xii ) that the term "South Azerbaijan" may have political connotation and political intention , but she claims she has not used that term in such a way ...
The books "Realities of Azerbaijan" and "Rural Transition in Azerbaijan" , could not be considered as a reliable source because they are books written by Az.republic's writers dealing with internal topics and have side notes to Iranian Azerbaijan , and that is natural for a writer of Azerbaijan republic to be unfamiliar with the terminology used in English-language regions .
In the book "Persian Dreams: Moscow and Tehran ..." in 7 times ( look at the Index of the book please) using the term "South Azerbaijan " , 4 of them is written as "so-called South Azerbaijan" ( pages 10 , 15 ,51 & 85 ). In other 3 times the usage is more a way of balancing the words Azerbaijan Republic and Iranian Azerbaijan in the sentence , rather than naming the Iranian region as South Azerbaijan .
Over all , in Wikipedia ,one the crucial rules is using the neutral language : why do want to use a term that many sources agree it is not neutral ? --Alborz Fallah (talk) 20:55, 11 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Iranian Azerbaijan[edit]

Four provinces in Iranian Azerbaijan

I think there is a misunderstanding about the map. As many researchers and historian believes there are there are four Provinces in Iranian Azerbaijan: West Azerbaijan, East Azerbaijan, Zanjan, and Ardabil. Based on this I think the map is current map in the page presenting the right territories of Iranian Azerbaijan.--F4fluids (talk) 15:58, 1 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, info taken from the Columbia Encyclopedia says that there are three provinces - west, east & ardabil azerbaijan-region-iran, and encyclopaedia britannica says that the region is bounded by gilan, zanjan & kordestan which of course excludes them as a part of iranian azerbaijan. Tertiary sources such as encyclopaedias generally present the mainstrean consensus opinion aggregated from other sources, could you provide stronger sources which claim there are four (including zanjan) provinces? I see also that in the Azerbaijan_(Iran)#Geography section there is also a claim that parts of hamadan are included, which is sourced to a travelogue written by a cardiologist, which is absolutely not a wp:rs for this assertion. Just because Iranian Azerbaijani people live in such and such a province does not automatically make that province a part of actual Iranian Azerbaijan. I would remove that claim right now, but as the article is semi'd I cannot. regards (talk) 01:14, 2 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi talk, Thanks for reply. My claim is because of the references inside the text; But for more references I would refer to: Tadeusz Swietochowski, Brian C. Collins, Historical Dictionary of Azerbaijan, Scarecrow Press, 1999, (see page P 65 where it is considering city of Zanjan, the capital of the province, a major Azerbaijani city in Iran) or M. Behrooz, Rebels With A Cause: The Failure of the Left in Iran, I. B. Tauris; 2000 (see page 27). The reference that you are suggesting is a general encyclopedia which is not essentially right about very detailed Iranian geography stub. About Hamadan: I don't have enough knowledge to discuss about that. Regards --F4fluids (talk) 16:22, 2 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 7 December 2014[edit]

Firstly,please change Azarbaijan to Azerbaijan in article because second one is true. There is no need to have a synonym for country names. Secondly, change the phrase that Tusi is a persian muslim scholar because if he was persian ,why did he use Azerbaijani language as well in his articles and make sure that Republic of Azerbaijan wouldn't name Observatory of Shamakhy after a persian scholar. Good luck with honor! Asgerli historical (talk) 04:02, 7 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 16:07, 7 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on Azerbaijan (Iran)[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected links on Azerbaijan (Iran) which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

    Triggered by \bbible\-history\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:07, 14 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Azerbaijan (Iran). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

  • Corrected formatting/usage for //

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:25, 1 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on Azerbaijan (Iran). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:55, 23 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Azerbaijan (Iran). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:15, 11 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New map of Rawadid dynasty[edit]

Rawadids (11th-12th century).

Can somebody please include this new map into history section of this article? It is important for article subject and I cannot include it into article because article is locked. (talk) 16:25, 29 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ответил здесь.--Taron Saharyan (talk) 17:45, 29 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is now neutral map version without surrounding states, whose borders were disputed by User:Taron Saharyan. New map depicts only (undisputed) borders of the Rawadid state. So, can somebody include this new map into this article? (talk) 09:24, 31 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]


change ((Nakhichevan)) to ((Nakhichevan District|Nakhichevan))

Done Thanks for spotting the undisambiguated link! — Iambic Pentameter (talk / contribs) 18:15, 13 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

add Demographic statistics[edit]

Demographic statistics[edit]

Name Capital Area (km2) Population
(2011 census)
East Azerbaijan Province Tabriz 45,650 3,724,620
West Azerbaijan Province Urmia 37,437 3,080,576
Ardabil Province Ardabil 17,800 1,248,488
Zanjan Province Zanjan 21,773 1,015,734
Total Azerbaijan (Iran) 122٬276 9٬069٬418
  • 122٬276 of 1,648,195 = 7.41 percent of Iran Area
  • 9٬069٬418 of 75,149,669 (2011 census) = 12.06 percent of Iran Population

Shouldn't we move this page?[edit]

I think we should move it to Azerbaijan, Iran. RullRatbwan (talk) 08:32, 28 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Azerbaijan (Iran). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:55, 12 July 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Azerbaijan (Iran). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:42, 16 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:51, 22 April 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Ud or uto was sumerian God in sipar and Ud-unog.UD was fire and sungod.the azar in semitic is Ud and Udur was sumerian fire god.this is azar(UD) land.azarbayjan is land of fir God UD.ud is mithra in hellenic form and tis is mithra land.mitrabayjan. (talk) 08:20, 31 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Zanjan, as part of Iranian Azerbaijan[edit]

Hi Rs4815, I would refer to either one of the below references about lands that considers part of Iranian Azerbaijan. The reference that you are citing (Britanica) is a general dictionary and probably have no say in detailed political geography of part of Iran. So if possible please stop reverting the article and changing it without discussion in discussion page of article. There is a section in discussion page about this. Thank you.

Tadeusz Swietochowski, Brian C. Collins, Historical Dictionary of Azerbaijan, Scarecrow Press, 1999, (see page P 65 where it is considering city of Zanjan, the capital of the province, a major Azerbaijani city in Iran)

M. Behrooz, Rebels With A Cause: The Failure of the Left in Iran, I. B. Tauris; 2000 (see page 27).

T. Atabaki, Azerbaijan: Ethnicity and the Struggle for Power in Iran, I.B.Tauris; 2000 (see page 90).

Thank you --F4fluids (talk) 18:34, 2 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

F4fluids Tadeusz Swietochowski calls Zanjan an "Azerbaijani city", which means "a city predominantly inhabited by ethnic Azerbaijanis" and not "a city in geographical Azerbaijan". T. Atabaki (one of your sources) actually says

Zanjan, though not administratively part of the Province of Azerbaijan, is culturally speaking considered the western frontier of Azerbaijan, due to its dominantly Azerbaijani population. (page 112)

Also we have Encyclopaedia Britannica, an authoritative source, which says that Zanjan is not part of Azerbaijan (we cannot simply ignore it). You also did not bring any quotes from "Rebels with a Cause: The Failure of the Left in Iran". --Rs4815 (talk) 19:35, 2 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rs4815 Thank you for reply. Page 65 of Swietchowski's book says "Major cities in Iranian Azerbaijan are Tabriz, Ardabil, Zanjan, Khoi ...". Zanjan is inside Zanjan Province and if the city is Azerbaijani, the province is also part of Iranian Azerbaijan (see page 2 of the same book). Page 90 of Atabaki's book says "Other cities of Azerbaijan, e.g. Zanjan ..."
I respect the encyclopedia that you are citing, however, I don't think it is a good idea to cite an encyclopedia for a detailed information about geography or any other fields. Please let me know if you think this is not convincing?--F4fluids (talk) 12:36, 3 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
F4fluids I still waiting to see quotes from Maziar Behrooz's book. And this is a quote from the article of Zanjan from the Encyclopedia of Islam:

The mediaeval geographers mostly placed Zandjan in Djibal province, usually linking it with Abhar [q.v] or Awhar some 80 km/50 miles to its south-east, but they usually stated that it was on the frontier with Adharbaydjan, and some authorities attributed it to Daylam or to Rayy.

I think that in order to be fair and impartial, we must give all available points of view, including Britannica, a highly respected encyclopedia, and also specify Atabaki’s point of view, indicating that he considers Zanjan a part of Azerbaijan in a cultural sense, not a geographical one. On the map, we must indicate Zanjan in a different color, probably pink, to show that this is a controversial point of view. --Rs4815 (talk) 15:36, 3 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Rs4815 Thanks again for your response. Although I don't think that is not a good idea to include encyclopedia as a reference (I mean if the goal is to go to other encyclopedia why we are having Wikipedia?), it is fair to include the other understandings too. About Behrouz's book, I mentioned the page and details of the reference. Basically it says Azerbaijani population in Iran "was divided in three provinces, East Azerbaijan, West Azerbaijan, and Zanjan." You may argue that the later reference is only about the Azerbaijani people not the land of Azerbaijan. About Atabaki's book,this is an academic history book. About Atabaki's book, it is clearly mentioned Azerbaijani city (there is no cultural or anything else follows the sentence).--F4fluids (talk) 20:35, 3 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
F4fluids thanks for the constructive dialogue. Wikipedia, by itself, as you know, is not a reliable source, this is its difference from academic encyclopedias. Regarding the Behrouz's book, as we see, it says nothing about this particular issue. As for Atabaki, I do not in any way dispute his authority on the topic, but we cannot just take into account his one statement and ignore another. On page 112, he clearly says that he attributes Zanjan to Azerbaijan in a cultural sense. There is also another interesting quote in Atabaki's work:

The Islamic geographers describe Azerbaijan as being bounded to the south by Zanjan and to the east by Deylamistan, Tarom and Gilan. To the west lay Varasan or Varadanm and the Araxes River formed the northern limit of the region. (page 8)

--Rs4815 (talk) 22:11, 3 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Rs4815, I think the best way to proceed is to include both opinion on what is included in Iranian Azerbaijan. I would some definition these four provencies ... are considered as Iranian Azerbaijan, while in other definition three provinces are included in Iranian Azerbaijan...if you agree with that, I can go ahead and implement the changes?
Yes, that would be the best solution. Please also replace the color of Zanjan province from red to pink (maybe #ff9498 ) on this map --Rs4815 (talk) 12:39, 5 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi again Rs4815, One more thing, there is no real administrative portion of Iran that calls Iranian Azerbaijan. There is no province nor state, that calls Iranian Azerbaijan. It is more of a cultural thing to call the piece of land in north western part of Iran, Iranian Azerbaijan. Otherwise from administrative point of view each of above mentioned provinces are a separate entities. In future these provinces may get divided to smaller pieces or united to a bigger piece to ease administrative works, but culturally they would be considered Iranian Azerbaijan.--F4fluids (talk) 12:43, 5 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think you're misunderstanding something, F4luids. This article is not about where the present-day Azeris form a majority, but the actual historic region of Azerbaijan, which Zanjan is not part of. Zanjan has historically been part of Media/Jibal/Persian Iraq, not Azerbaijan. See this map (sources listed in the description) for example [13]. --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:04, 5 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Iranian Azerbaijan (in general sense) is a term of historical geography and not a modern cultural region. For comparison, we consider Western Azerbaijan as a whole part of Iranian Azerbaijan, although Kurds prevail in a significant part of it, and before the 20th century, a lot of Armenians and Assyrians lived there. --Rs4815 (talk) 13:36, 5 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agreed with HistoryofIran and Rs4815, this is not about "a cultural region" but about a historical region. Zanjan has obviously nothing to do in Azerbaijan.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 14:01, 5 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wikaviani, thank you for participating in this discussion. I don't understand what is your argument is based on, if Zanjan has nothing to do with Azerbaijan, then you mean all of the references are mentioned in first part of this discussion are wrong??? I don't understand the base of your argument. --F4fluids (talk) 15:50, 5 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Rs4815, thanks again for prompt response, the reason that I mentioned about cultural region is that you pointed that one of the cited references is talking including Zanjan is in Azerbaijan in a cultural sense. And Atabaki is only one of the references. So I think the best way to follow through is to mention that in some references Zanjan is considered as part of Iranian Azerbaijan and in some other references it is not considered as part of Iranian Azerbaijan. Please let me know if you agree with this argument? --F4fluids (talk) 15:50, 5 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@F4fluids: As explained above, Zanjan, while being a region mostly inhabited by ethnic Azerbaijanis, has nothing to do with the historical region called Azerbaijan. Best regards.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 16:10, 5 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
F4fluids, now we have 4 sources that are considering this issue. 2 of them (the Encyclopedia of Islam and Britannica) do not classify Zanjan as part of Iranian Azerbaijan, 1 source (Atabaki) not including Zanjan as part of Iranian Azerbaijan in a geographical sense, still considers it to be part of Azerbaijan in a cultural sense (due to the predominance of the Azerbaijani population there) and 1 source (Swietochowski) considers Zanjan a part of Iranian Azerbaijan in a geographical sense (unless of course there are other quotes from this book that say otherwise). In the introduction, we must indicate in brief all three points of view, and in the body of the article consider the issue in more detail. My suggestion:

Generally accepted that Iranian Azerbaijan includes three northwestern Iranian provinces: Western Azerbaijan, Eastern Azerbaijan and Ardabil. Several authors also include Zanjan in this list, some in a geographical sense, others only culturally (due to the predominance of the Azeri Turkic population there).

--Rs4815 (talk) 18:22, 5 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Rs4815 I just researched and find this piece of legislation law by Iranian Parliment on December 19, 1907 (please see [14]). As per as article 2 of this legislation, there is only Azerbaijan mentioned as one of the four States in Iran (We may assume that Zanjan is considered part of Iranian Azerbaijan).
Regarding the edit, I don't see neither of us have more clues. It seems to me both of us have biased opinion regarding the article. Normally the next step would have been to ask for a neutral opinion, which I don't have much leisure of time to go through the process. If you agree, I think we should give equal weight to both sides. Again thank you for taking time and for the civil discussion.--F4fluids (talk) 18:54, 5 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The opinion of the parliment is irrelevant. Also, the site seems dodgy. Have you even read the comments of other users? This article is about the historic region of Azerbaijan, not where the present-day Azeris form a majority. --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:59, 5 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
HistoryofIran Thank you for your feedback. This article title is Iranian Azerbaijan, it include history of Iranian Azerbaijan as well and refers to that, but that is not the major content of the article (please read through the article and its contents). Please also read through the other responses as well that are cited for discussion (Atabaki, Behrouz, Swietochowski, ...). I don't understand how do you mean Iranian legislation of 1909 is irrelevant (mentioned in the website of Iranian parliament, I do not understand how do you call the official web site of Iranian Parliament dodgy and what it means???). The conclusion from cited legislation is that at some period of history Zanjan was also part of Iranian Azerbaijan. --F4fluids (talk) 20:07, 5 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, this is about historic Azerbaijan, as several other editors have already told you. Something to do with the 1907 Iranian parliament from a Persian website is not an academic source and irrelevant. Rs4815 has already answered you regarding those sources, none of whom considers Zanjan part of historic Azerbaijan. I'm restoring the article back to its original version. --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:20, 5 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
HistoryofIran The Farsi web site that you mentioned is the official site of Iranian Parliament. The article that is cited is an official legislation that has passed. You do not have right to delete article as you wish the history should have been. We should as for a neutral opinion. --F4fluids (talk) 20:38, 5 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ask for a neutral opinion? Three users are disagreeing with you! Also, avoid writing nonsense like "You do not have right to delete article as you wish the history should have been". --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:54, 5 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
HistoryofIran you didn't even follow the other users suggestions! If we cannot even hold a civil argument, the whole discussion is pointless. Good luck! --F4fluids (talk) 21:25, 5 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@F4fluids: With all due respect, i think that the one who fails to get what other users say is you, not HistoryofIran. Let's refrain from WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT behaviours and move forward. Best.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 22:11, 5 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Wikaviani:...thank you for your feedback. F4fluids
F4fluids I have read the text of the legislation, but it says absolutely nothing about Zanjan province. It just says that Iran is administratively divided into 4 provinces (1. Azerbaijan, 2. Kerman and Balochistan, 3. Fars and 4. Khorasan). There is nothing said about the borders of these provinces. In addition, you yourself said above that administrative changes in the borders of the provinces called "Azerbaijan" do not change the borders of Iranian Azerbaijan, otherwise we would have to exclude Ardabil from Iranian Azerbaijan, just because this province is not called Azerbaijan since 1993. Administrative "Azerbaijan" can change borders at the whim of politicians (since 1918 even a republic with this name appeared in Transcaucasia), but a historical geographic region cannot. --Rs4815 (talk) 11:02, 6 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Rs4815 Thank you for reply. My whole point was that: there is no reference to Zanjan in the legislation, which I was concluding that it is considered part of Azerbaijan State at that legislation (my conclusion might be wrong). I agree with your suggested revision, if you have time please go ahead and implement it, I do not have any more clues. Anyway, someone else in middle of the discussion reverted the introduction part of the article. Again, thank you for your time and for discussion. --F4fluids (talk) 13:26, 6 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 10 April 2020[edit]

Title is wrongly pronounced. The right title is Azarbaiyjan and it is from older new-Persian word Ādharbādhagān. Please change the title. It is wrong pronunciation that used by turkic language that they can not pronounce the wat it should be.

Thanks Sassanrakhshani (talk) 21:47, 10 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done Sorry, this is the English Wikipedia and we use the name of this region in English.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 21:57, 10 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]


"This term is mainly used by the people of the Republic of Azerbaijan and its usage in Iran is extremely rare.". Can someone please provide source for this? — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 10:33, 11 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not sure if you have ever visited Wikiproject Azerbaijan but it also covers articles relating to Azerbaijanis, just like WP Armenia, which you mentioned. Direct quote from the first sentence of the WP AZ lead: "This project has been created to better organize information in, and improve articles related to Azerbaijan and Azerbaijani people." About your second point, I'm not arguing for AZ WP inclusion in Iran, this is an article of a region which is currently mostly inhabited by Azerbaijanis. — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 16:54, 25 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Maybe i was not clear enough, so i'm gonna say it again, there is only one historic region of Azerbaijan, the Iranian one, that was called "Atropatene" long time ago. There was no "Azerbaijan" north of Aras before 1918 and the newly created Republic of Azerbaijan took that name of "Azerbaijan", just like the historic region. Hope to have been clear enough.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 01:10, 26 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Are you sure we're talking about the same thing? I'm talking about WP AZ's inclusion in the talk page of an article that is historically and currently mostly inhabited by ethnic Azerbaijanis, which WP AZ covers. — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 05:55, 26 October 2020 (UTC) — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 05:55, 26 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WP:OR. Beshogur (talk) 06:57, 26 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, i'm sure we're talking about the same thing, but apparently, we don't read the same books about history ... To be clear, with your rationale, one should add WP IR to the Turkish Kurdistan talk page, since Kurds are ethnic Iranians ... The Republic of Azerbaijan has nothing to do with the historic region of Iranian Azerbaijan, except its name.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 19:27, 26 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The thing is, I'm not arguing for WP AZ's inclusion in Iran article. I'm arguing for WP AZ's (which covers both the republic and the Azerbaijani ethnic group) inclusion in an article about a region populated mostly by Azerbaijanis. Bringing up history each time when that's not even what I'm arguing about is irrelevant. And please do better comparisons next time. WP Kurdistan is included in Iranian Kurdistan article's talk page. — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 19:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You are comparing apples with pears. Kurds are not Iranian, but Iranic people. Totally different thing. Claiming Azerbaijan has nothing to do with Iranian Azerbaijan is also absurd. These are two neighboring regions with the same people inhabiting the area, with historical bridges connecting the areas. Beshogur (talk) 19:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Beshogur: Kurds are ethnic Iranians, i'm able to provide many sources for that, wether you like that or not does not matter. Just an example :
[15] i quote "The Kurds, an Iranian people of the Near East, live at the junction of more or less laicised Turkey, S̲h̲īʿi Iran, Arab and Sunnī ʿIrāḳ and North Syria, and Soviet Transcaucasia."
Again, the more i interact with you, the more i feel that you're not here to build an encyclopedia, since you ignore what sources say and think you can decide what is right or wrong.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 20:53, 26 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@CuriousGolden: I said Turkish Kurdistan, not Iranian Kurdistan. WP IR is not included in the Turkish Kurdistan talk page, while, as i showed to both of you guys above, Kurds are ethnic Iranians, just like Iranian Azerbaijanis are ethnic Azerbaijanis ...---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 21:09, 26 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Wikaviani: Your logic is really making me confused. Kurds are an ethnic group. Iranic is the ethnic family group they belong to. Am I trying to add WP of all Turkic countries to this page? No. And, I said Iranian Kurdistan because it's more similar to our case and WP Kurdistan is there. I'm very confused as to why inclusion of a WP about ethnic Azeris is not allowed to be in the talk page of a region that's the homeland of biggest group of ethnic Azeris. — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 07:16, 27 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ok, let me see if i got you straight.

  • You said : "Iranic is the ethnic family group they belong to"
  • Answer : Yes, but Kurds are iranic just like Azerbaijanis are Turkic. The word iranic means ethnic Iranian (thus, not necessarily a citizen of Iran) just like Turkic means ethnic Turk (thus, not necessarily a citizen of Turkey).
  • You said : "Am I trying to add WP of all Turkic countries to this page? No. And, I said Iranian Kurdistan because it's more similar to our case and WP Kurdistan is there."
  • Answer : i don't say that we should add WP of every iranic countries to Turkish Kurdistan either (like WP Afghanistan or WP Tajikistan), i said that, with your rationale, one should add WP Iran to the Turkish Kurdistan article.
  • You said "I'm very confused as to why inclusion of a WP about ethnic Azeris is not allowed to be in the talk page of a region that's the homeland of biggest group of ethnic Azeris."
  • Answer : Then i should be very confused too as to why the inclusion of a WP about ethnic Iranians is not allowed to be in the talk page of a region that's the homeland of the biggest group of ethnic Kurds (Turkish Kurdistan is the home of the largest group of ethnic Kurds) ...---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 08:37, 27 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • You said: "Yes, but Kurds are iranic just like Azerbaijanis are Turkic. The word iranic means ethnic Iranian (thus, not necessarily a citizen of Iran) just like Turkic means ethnic Turk (thus, not necessarily a citizen of Turkey)."
  • Answer: Yes, this is what I'm saying. No one is saying that Iranian Azeris are Azerbaijani citizens, they are ethnic Azerbaijanis which WP AZ covers.
  • You said: "i don't say that we should add WP of every iranic countries to Turkish Kurdistan either (like WP Afghanistan or WP Tajikistan), i said that, with your rationale, one should add WP Iran to the Turkish Kurdistan article."
  • Answer: I have no clue how you got the idea that that was my idea. There's either an accidental or intentional miscommunication here. Let's put it this way for you to understand. I'm perfectly fine with WP Kurdistan being in Turkish Kurdistan article talk page. Just like I think it's important to include WP Azerbaijan being in Iranian Azerbaijan's article talk page. What you're saying is like me arguing for a hypothetical Turkic WP in this article. I'm not arguing for that. I'm arguing for a specific ethnic group's WP being included in an article about a region that's the homeland to the biggest amount of that ethnic group.
  • You said: "Then i should be very confused too as to why the inclusion of a WP about ethnic Iranians is not allowed to be in the talk page of a region that's the homeland of the biggest group of ethnic Kurds (Turkish Kurdistan is the home of the largest group of ethnic Kurds) ..."
  • Answer: Again, you're doing completely wrong comparisons. You could include WP Iran if that specific ethnicity didn't have a WP of its own, but WP Kurdistan already exists and it's already included in Turkish Kurdistan's talk page. — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 08:59, 27 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Wikaviani:, you are messing up two terms, Iranian citizens and Iranian/Iranic peoples. WP Iran doesn't cover Iranic peoples. Beshogur (talk) 09:09, 27 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Beshogur and CuriousGolden: Yeah ? so how do you explain this : "Welcome to WikiProject Iran – a WikiProject set up to cooperate on all articles related to Iran and Iranians. The project covers the present and past of the Iranian cultural continent (Greater Iran or Greater Persia).". And when you click on "Iranians", you get the "Iranian peoples" page ... In short, either we keep WP AZ here, and then we add WP Iran to the Turkish Kurdistan page, or we remove WP AZ from this page.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 12:06, 27 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, then you should add WP Iran to Turkish Kurdistan. Nothing wrong. I still can not see any reason removing WP Azerbaijan, and WP Armenia not, if you're right about Armenia having connections to Armenians living there. Beshogur (talk) 12:11, 27 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Actually, it's even more legit to add WP IR to the Turkish Kurdistan page than to keep WP AZ here, because Iran is an entity that exists for thousands years in that region and successive Iranian empires controlled large parts (if not totally) of the Turkish Kurdistan region. Why Armenia should remain and Azerbaijan should not ? just because parts of Iranian Azerbaijan belonged to historic Armenia, while again, Azerbaijan is a newly created country that never included any parts of Iranian Azerbaijan.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 12:23, 27 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Why Armenia should remain and Azerbaijan should not ? just because parts of Iranian Azerbaijan belonged to historic Armenia huh, let's include WP Turkey here too because Ottomans ruled this area as well? Beshogur (talk) 13:56, 27 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "huh, let's include WP Turkey here too because Ottomans ruled this area as well?"
The Ottomans didn't have a historic impact on Iranian Azerbaijan, unlike Armenians, whose centuries/millenia old churches are still scattered all over Iranian Azerbaijan. The Ottomans just occupied the area for like 40 years during a time span of 5 centuries. They did not leave any monuments, aspects of culture, or whatsoever in the area. I could make a far better case for the inclusion of the Persian transliteration for numerous cities and regions in Turkey, such as Van, (i.e. Achaemenids, Parthians, Sasanids, Safavids, etc.), amongst others, than you possibly could for Iranian Azerbaijan.
IMO, keeping WP Azerbaijan at this article is a case of WP:TENDENTIOUS editing. WP Azerbaijan is dedicated primarily to the nation known as the Republic of Azerbaijan, which was founded in 1918/1991. Its name was taken from this Iranian region, similar to the case of Slavic Republic of Macedonia (now North Macedonia). WP Azerbaijan has no place on an article about an Iranian historic region, which predates the foundation of this 20th century republic by many millenia.
Also I just found out that WP Iran got removed[16] from Talk:Azerbaijan, even though the soil that constitutes present-day Azerbaijan Republic is intrinsically connected to Iran's history and culture for thousands of years. There are dozens of WP:RS sources, including in the article itself, which are permeated with this simple fact. If WP Azerbaijan should be added to Iranian Azerbaijan, then WP Iran should be added to almost every single city, place, and region in the Azerbaijan Republic. Gaming the system is not allowed on Wikipedia. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:23, 27 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fine, still can not understand how Azerbaijan isn't related to this. That covers Azerbaijanis as well. Beshogur (talk) 15:30, 27 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you can't, then with all due respect, you may have a competence issue.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 17:12, 27 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@LouisAragon: "WP Azerbaijan is dedicated primarily to the nation known as the Republic of Azerbaijan, which was founded in 1918/1991.". This is wrong though. WP Azerbaijan covers both the republic and the ethnic group of Azerbaijanis, which includes Iranian Azerbaijanis. — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 15:59, 27 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

{{ping|Beshogur|CuriousGolden]] Ottomans Turks dominated the region for some decades after the battle of Chaldiran, but their footprint there is negligible. How can you compare millenias of Iranian domination over Turkish Kurdistan or centuries of Armenian domination over parts of Iranian Azerbaijan with 30-40 years of Ottoman rule ???---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 17:07, 27 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Eldiguzids, state based in north Azerbaijan ruled over that area for 100 years, is that really what matters? And I have to state Aq Qoyunlus and Qara Qoyunlus, both were Anatolia based states at start, not Iran. But that's totally irrelevant, these things we speak are completely unnecessary. Beshogur (talk) 17:35, 27 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I feel like all of you are going off-track with this. I never brought up history in my arguments, I'm asking you to do the same as this discussion is not about that. WP AZ, which covers both the republic and the ethnic group of Azerbaijanis (which Iranian Azerbaijanis belong to) should be included in an article about a region that is mostly inhabited by ethnic Azerbaijanis. If you disagree with this, please reply to specifically that without bringing up when the AZ Republic was formed and et cetera. — CuriousGolden (talk·contrib) 17:49, 27 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I disagree, since the historic background plays a big role. But i have no interest in continuing this meaningless thread with two editors who ignore 2000 years of Iranian/Armenian presence in that region, comparing it with the presence of a 102 years old country based on the fact that "Azerbaijan Republic and Iranian Azerbaijan speak the same language". This would be like Adding WP Peru, WP Chile, WP Argentina and WP Paraguay to the Bolivia article, since all these countries speak the same language ... Done here for now.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 23:30, 29 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Again you are making meaningless comparison, now with colonised states. See Transylvania, a Romanian territory under the scope of WP Hungary. Beshogur (talk) 07:57, 30 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm not sure why the fact that they were originally colonized somehow makes this comparison become meaningless. Perhaps you could explain a bit more? Not really seeing the relevance of Transylvania here either, throwing random links of article talk pages is just gonna convulute this discussion even further. --HistoryofIran (talk) 10:42, 30 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"rv nonsense."[edit]

@LouisAragon:, what's the problem with my last edits? What's nonsense here? And nice attitude. @Wikaviani:, your last dispute about WP:Azerbaijan wasn't constructive either. Also what's "last warning"? You never warned me. Except the sources and templates, "Azerbaijani" comes 56 times on this article. This is deliberately lying. South Azerbaijan is redirected here. Either we split it into two, one historic region, other political concept, or you accept this category. Can't say much about Azerbaijani language. That's supposed to be South Azerbaijani not Azerbaijani. Ready to listen both. Beshogur (talk) 00:09, 23 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"your last dispute about WP:Azerbaijan wasn't constructive" Well, one cannot say that your attitude in that thread was great, and i don't see how exactly i was not constructive. Throwing arround baseless accusations will not help.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 02:38, 25 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not sure why "South Azerbaijani" was reverted as "nonsense". It's the name of the dialect, not an irredentist name. Also, agree that it should be cleared if this article is about the historical region or the political concept. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 07:02, 23 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also claiming this is a sort of ancient region is ridiculous. Isn't that Atropatene? Beshogur (talk) 07:39, 23 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I kinda get both parties, but this statement doesn't make much sense. It obviously is an ancient region, what do you propose? That we merge Atropatene and Adurbadagan into this article? Obviously those were different periods of the history of Azerbaijan, and are deserving of their own article. Also, what is the point of creating a discussion here if you are going to take this to two admins anyways? [17] [18]. The discussion has barely even started. --HistoryofIran (talk) 11:55, 23 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@HistoryofIran: Those two reverts are not fair reverts. I don't think this is a nonsense, and other user denying the article's relationship with Azerbaijanis. About historical region, yes it is, but majority of the article is about current things. Beshogur (talk) 15:45, 23 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree with HistoryofIran and also believe that we shouldn't go off track with this discussion as it's quite easy to forget the main point of it. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 15:48, 23 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@CuriousGolden:, how will other two users explain their edit. 1. How is South Azerbaijani irrelevant but Northern Azerbaijani isn't. 2. Why is the Azerbaijani irredentism category removed. As I said, either split it as a historical region and a political concept, or accept the category. Beshogur (talk) 15:50, 23 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree with your points. I believe these 2 questions should be the main topic of this discussion and we shouldn't derail it by the earlier discussed Atropatene stuff. — CuriousGolden (T·C) 15:52, 23 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
1) If "South Azerbaijani" is supposedly the proper name of the Arabic-script Azeri Turkish as used in historic Azerbaijan, a historic region in Iran, then every page containing Latin Azerbaijani used in the Republic of Azerbaijan should be changed to "North Azerbaijani", per the same rationale. If so, this should be done through a WP:RFC per WP:CON. Changing it on one Wikipedia page without edit summary is disruptive editing (i.e. WP:GAME).
2) Also, this article is about a historic region. How on earth can a political concept coined in the Soviet Union be added to this page? I guess a separate page "Southern Azerbaijan (political concept) can be made similar to "Western Azerbaijan (political concept)". - LouisAragon (talk) 21:17, 23 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As Wikipedia is written using reliable sources:
Bournoutian, George A. (2016). The 1820 Russian Survey of the Khanate of Shirvan: A Primary Source on the Demography and Economy of an Iranian Province prior to its Annexation by Russia. Gibb Memorial Trust.;
p. xvi

"As noted, in order to construct an Azerbaijani national history and identity based on the territorial definition of a nation, as well as to reduce the influence of Islam and Iran, the Azeri nationalists, prompted by Moscow devised an "Azeri" alphabet, which replaced the Arabo-Persian script. In the 1930s a number of Soviet historians, including the prominent Russian Orientalist, Ilya Petrushevskii, were instructed by the Kremlin to accept the totally unsubstantiated notion that the territory of the former Iranian khanates (except Yerevan, which had become Soviet Armenia) was part of an Azerbaijani nation. Petrushevskii's two important studies dealing with the South Caucasus, therefore, use the term Azerbaijan and Azerbaijani in his works on the history of the region from the sixteenth to the nineteenth centuries. Other Russian academics went even further and claimed that an Azeri nation had existed from ancient times and had continued to the present. Since all the Russian surveys and almost all nineteenth-century Russian primary sources referred to the Muslims who resided in the South Caucasus as "Tatars" and not "Azerbaijanis", Soviet historians simply substituted Azerbaijani for Tatars. Azeri historians and writers, starting in 1937, followed suit and began to view the three-thousand-year history of the region as that of Azerbaijan. The pre-Iranian, Iranian, and Arab eras were expunged. Anyone who lived in the territory of Soviet Azerbaijan was classified as Azeri; hence the great Iranian poet Nezami, who had written only in Persian, became the national poet of Azerbaijan."

p. xv;

"Although the overwhelming number of nineteenth-century Russian and Iranian, as well as present-day European historians view the Iranian province of Azarbayjan and the present-day Republic of Azerbaijan as two separate geographical and political entities, modern Azeri historians and geographers view it as a single state that has been separated into "northern" and "southern" sectors and which will be united in the future."

p. xviii;

"Since the collapse of the Soviet Union the current Azeri historians have not only continued to use the terms "northern" and "southern" Azerbaijan, but also assert that the present-day Armenian Republic was a part of northern Azerbaijan. In their fury over what they view as the "Armenian occupation" of Nagorno-Karabakh [which incidentally was an autonomous Armenian region within Soviet Azerbaijan], Azeri politicians and historians deny any historic Armenian presence in the South Caucasus and add that all Armenian architectural monuments located in the present-day Republic of Azerbaijan are not Armenian but [Caucasian] Albanian."

- LouisAragon (talk) 21:21, 23 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@LouisAragon:, I don't understand your point here. That's not how Azerbaijan is spelled in Northern Azerbaijani. I suppose, it's right to change all to South Azerbaijani considering it has its own language code. For the second, why is the Azerbaijani irredentism tag nonsense? I can not separate the article right now. To be honest, don't have the materials to do right now. So it should stay here. Beshogur (talk) 07:07, 24 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
North Azerbaijani has its own language code like South Azerbaijani. If you wish to replace all instances of Arabic-script Azerbaijani in Wikipedia articles with the template "South Azerbaijani", then every instance wherein Latin Azerbaijani is used (which tantamounts to every article of the Republic of Azerbaijan) should be swapped with a template called "North Azerbaijani". Azerbaijani irredentism which was created in the 20th century under Soviet auspices doesn't belong here. End off.;edit02:31, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
@Wikaviani:, Northern Azerbaijani does have "azj" code, but that's not the point here. Azerbaijani refers to North Azerbaijani because southern does not have any regulations. So, that is not how Azerbaijan is spelled in standart Azerbaijani. That's my point. Would you change everything about Afghanistan that's in Dari to Persian? And almost all irredentist concepts and nationalist ideas originated in 20th century, you are just deleting half of wikipedia. If this article does not have anything with the modern world, why does it have so much recent info? Perhaps we can delete all, hold the historical infos? Some people refer to Iranian Azerbaijan as South (or Southern) Azerbaijan and the Republic of Azerbaijan as Northern Azerbaijan,[9] although others believe that these terms are irredentist and politically motivated.[10][11][12], the category indeed has place here. It's a simple category. Beshogur (talk) 18:03, 24 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@LouisAragon:, the problem is, some users removing North Azerbaijani transliteration from articles like Tabriz, etc. and if here has "Āzerbāyjān" as transliteration, it's better to adapt Azb code instead of Aze code. To make it clear what the difference is, or we can leave the ipo only. Beshogur (talk) 11:48, 25 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

some problem in map[edit]

There's Zanjan state in south Azerbaijan and that isn't in map Turk.Dr (talk) 14:05, 30 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Historical region =/= modern ultranationalist territorial claims. --Qahramani44 (talk) 22:12, 30 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Soviet Azerbaijan is the same ethnicity[edit]

It says Soviet Azerbaijan appropriated the name in the 1920s. It should be mentioned that the Iranian Azerbaijani people are the same ethnicity as the Azerbaijani people of the North. KY-Acc (talk) 03:19, 1 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:56, 12 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:25, 30 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Zanjan Province[edit]

Some reliable sources in their texts and maps have considered Zanjan Province (Former Wilayah of Khamseh) as part of Iranian Azerbaijan:

Map of Atropatene: Which covers the eastern lands of Ghezel Ozan River (current province of Zanjan).
The face of the Earth (977): Border of Azerbaijan is to Shemiran Castle on the border of current provinces of Zanjan and Qazvin.
The face of the Earth (977): The location of Zanjan is marked inside the map of Azerbaijan (southeastern part of the region).
Map of Iran in Afsharid Era (1747): The current county of Tarom is marked as part of Azerbaijan.
Map of Azerbaijani khanates in the 18th-19th centuries (1747): The Zanjan Khanate[1] is marked as part of the Azerbaijani Khanates.
Map of Iran (1756): Which the Zanjan Khanate is a part of the Azerbaijani Khanates of Iran (with dark color in the northwest of the country).
Map of the Azerbaijan People's Government (1945-1946): Which covers the current province of Zanjan.

Kitāb Al-Boldān, Ibn al-Faqih (903):[2]

And the limit of Azerbaijan from the limit of Barza’ to the limit of Zanjan...

History of the Prophets and Kings (915):[3]

First, they should take the border from Hamedan to go out to Abhar and Zangan and finally to the Caspian Sea and in the middle, whatever the cities are, they should all be called Azerbaigan.

Muntaqila al-Talibiyya (1078):[4]

(Sohrevard) from the land of Azerbaijan...

Muhajiran Al Abu Talib (1078):[5]

Sohrevard: From the areas of Azerbaijan... is the name of a city near Zanjan...

The Complete History (1231):[6]

And the last thing in which the sermon was held for Muhammad Zanjan was from the following Azerbaijan...

Tazkareh Hezar Mazar (1389):[7][8]

Sajas is a village that is pleasant from the beginning, it was a small city in ancient times and it was destroyed in the Mongol dynasty and it is one of the additions of Azerbaijan.

Habib al-siyar (1524):[9]

They prepared to leave for Azerbaijan and carried out murder and looting ceremonies in Zanjan, Ardabil and Sara[b].

Sharafnama (1597):[10][11]

In the meantime, the Wilayah of Azerbaijan, which had been captured by the Ottomans, appointed the government of DovlatyarKhan to protect the border of the limits of Azerbaijan, and the area of Kershab and ZarrinKamar and Sajas and Zanjan and Surlaq and Qeydar and Shabestan and Ankuran...

Noqawat al-Athar fi Dhekr al-Akhyar (1598):[12]

To the state and emirate of all the Mamalik al-Azerbaijan from the border of Abhar and Soltaniyeh to the farthest points of Aran...

Tadhkirat al-mulūk (1732):[13][14]

Azerbaijan: Beylerbeyi of Tabriz:... Soltanieh and Zanjan.

Rostam al-tavarikh (1779):[15]

He left for Azerbaijan. In a period of seven years... Urmia, Maragheh, Ardabil, Khoy, Tabriz... Zanjan and the borders of Talesh and... the rest of that blessed Mamlaka has been captured and occupied...

Bustān as-siyāḥa (1832):[16]

Mention of Zanjan: The city is full of happiness from [Ajam of] Iraq, now has been considered as an addition to Azerbaijan for a long time.

Haqayeq al-Akhbar Naseri (1862):[17][18]

Because during this period, the Firuzi Kovkab Homayun Kovkab [Naser al-Din Shah Qajar] visited the area of [Ajam of] Iraq and Khamseh of Azerbaijan[19]...

Turkmen War (1876):[20][21][22]

The story is about the life of a person named Gholam Hossein, who was born in a village in the Khamseh of Azerbaijan.

Merat al-Boldan (1877):[23]

From Ardabil to Zanjan is five houses and to Khoy, which is the final city of Azerbaijan, is twenty-seven farsakhs.

Afzal al-Tavarikh (1899):[24]

The other mamlaka of Iran is "Azerbaijan", which Europeans writhe it "Atropatene". It is a vast mamlaka and has big cities. From Tehran and Qazvin, the Khamseh land is the beginning of the land of Azerbaijan, which leads to the Aras River.

Dehkhoda Dictionary (1931):[25][26][27]

Zanjan: It is a city to Azerbaijan. The ruling city of Khamseh Wilayah... In the books of geographers, this city was sometimes considered as a region from Deylam, sometimes as part of Jibal, sometimes as part of Azerbaijan, and sometimes as part of Rey.

Sharh Zendegani Man (1945):[28]

After the formation of Ahmad Ghavam's cabinet, and the departure of the Russian army from Iran... Although this autonomy in the agreements and resolutions of the government limited to the third and fourth provinces and in no way did it include Khamseh Wilayah, which is part of the first province, the democratic government of Tabriz did not want to give up take this wilayah, and withdraw its sacrifices from Zanjan and other parts of this wilayah.

Tabaghat Aa'lam Al-Shia (1954):[29]

Al-Abhari Al-Isfahani: Relating to Abhar affiliated with Isfahan... And it is different from Abhar in Azerbaijan.

History of Iran from ancient times to the present (1980):[30]

Mohammad Khayabani and his supporters resolutely fought against the 1919 agreement... they declared Azerbaijan of Iran autonomous, within the framework of Iran... After the April uprising in Tabriz, the power of the Democrats extended to Urmia, Khoy, Ardabil, Maragheh, Salmas, Zanjan and Azerbaijan was declared as "Azadistan"... Teaching in Azerbaijani schools was conducted in the Azerbaijani language. In Tabriz, Urmia and Zanjan alone, 325 primary schools and 82 new high schools were opened.

Gitashenasi Geographical and cartographic Publication (1983):[31][32]

Khamseh: Former wilayah of Iran, in the south of Azerbaijan and west of Iran. Its center was Zanjan and one of its famous cities was Soltaniyeh. The 5 main blocks (Khamseh means five) that made up Khamseh Wilayah were: 1. AbaharRud 2. KharRud [Khodabandeh] 3. ZanjanRud 4. IjRud 5. SajasRud.

Encyclopedia of the World of Islam (2001):[33][34]

Beylerbeyi of Azerbaijan included 26 rulers, including Astara, Maragheh... Soltaniyeh and Zanjan.

Relations between Iran and the Republic of Azerbaijan (2005):[35][36]

And cities such as Tabriz, Ardabil and Zanjan have been considered as cities of Azerbaijan.

History of Shiism in Azerbaijan (2006):[37]

He opened one of the castles of "Abhar" and made peace with them on conditions, and this was the first time that Muslims entered Azerbaijan.

Calendar of Contemporary History of Iran (2006):[38]

Order to pursue the republicanism as strongly as possible to the military commanders of Azerbaijan: In a letter to the ten commanders of the military districts of Meshkin, Ardabil, Marand, Khoy, Maragheh, Salas (Urmia, Salmas, Solduz), Savojbolagh, Zanjan, Maku and Ahar... The British sources present in Azerbaijan believed that "the majority of the Azerbaijani people are opposed to the idea of a republic in Iran."

THE CAUCASUS: an introduction (2009):[39]

Azerbaijan: The region covering the northern provinces of Iran: East Azerbaijan, West Azerbaijan, Ardabil and Zanjan.

  • Note This users proposal was already rejected in a commons discussion, as his addition is full of WP:OR, non-WP:RS and even texts taken out of context. Moreover, this user heavily lacks in WP:CIR, as he does not speak English and thus solely relies on Google Translate, making it much harder to have a proper discussion with him. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:58, 26 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  1. ^ Рафаэль Хакимов, Азербайджанские государства. Зенджанское ханство (1747—1810), Реальное время
  2. ^ ابن فقیه، احمد بن محمد، البلدان، بیروت: عالم الکتب، ۱۴۱۶ قمری، ص ۵۸۲.
  3. ^ محمد بن حریر طبری، تاریخ طبری یا تاریخ الرسل و الملوک، جلد ۵، ترجمه و تلخیص ابوعلی بلعمی، ترجمه ابوالقاسم پاینده، تهران: اساطیر، ۱۳۶۲، ص ۱۹۷۹.
  4. ^ ابن طباطبا علوی اصفهانی، ابراهیم بن ناصر، منتقلة الطالبیة، قم: المکتبة الحیدریة، ۱۳۷۷، ص ۱۷۸.
  5. ^ ابن طباطبا علوی اصفهانی، ابراهیم بن ناصر (۱۳۷۲)، مهاجران آل ابوطالب، ترجمه محمدرضا عطائی، مشهد: آستان قدس رضوی، بنیاد پژوهشهای اسلامی، چاپ اول، ص ۴۸۰.
  6. ^ ابن اثیر، علی بن محمد، الکامل فی التاریخ، جلد ۱۰، بیروت: دار صادر، ۱۳۸۵ قمری، ص ۳۵۹.
  7. ^ جنید بن محمود جنید شیرازی، تذکره هزار مزار، به تصحیح عبدالوهاب نورانی وصال، تهران: کتابخانه احمدی شیراز، چاپ دوم، ۱۳۶۴.
  8. ^ جنید بن محمود جنید شیرازی، شد الإزار فی حط الأوزار عن زوار المزار، به تصحیح محمد قزوینی، عباس اقبال آشتیانی، تهران: چاپخانه مجلس‏، چاپ اول، ۱۳۲۸، ص ۳۱۲.
  9. ^ خواند میر، غیاث‌الدین بن همام‌الدین، تاریخ حبیب السیر فی اخبار افراد بشر، جلد ۳، تهران: خیام، ۱۳۸۰، ص ۳۳.
  10. ^ بدلیسی، شرف الدین بن شمس الدین، شرفنامه / تعریب، جلد ۱، دمشق: دار الزمان، ۲۰۰۶، ص ۳۱۰.
  11. ^ بدلیسی، شرف الدین بن شمس الدین، شرفنامه، محقق: ولیامینوف، ولادیمیر، ۲ جلد، تهران: اساطیر، ۱۳۷۷، جلد ۱، صص ۳۲۵-۳۲۴.
  12. ^ افوشه‌ای نطنزی، محمود، نقاوه الآثار فی ذکر الاخبار، تصحیح احسان شرقی، تهران، بنگاه ترجمه و نشر کتاب، ۱۳۵۰: ص ۱۵۸.
  13. ^ میرزا سمیعا، تذکرةالملوک: سازمان اداری حکومت صفوی یا تعلیقات مینورسکی بر تذکرةالملوک، به کوشش دکتر سید محمد دبیرسیاقی، ترجمه مسعود رجب‌نیا، تهران: مؤسسه انتشارات امیرکبیر، ۱۳۷۸، صص ۷۰، ۷۸-۷۲، ۱۸۸-۱۹۶.
  14. ^ اکرم حسین‌پور، منیژه تراب‌زاده، فهیمه وزیری، فریبا شهیدی‌فر، ماهیت تحولات در آسیای مرکزی و قفقاز، تهران: مؤسسه چاپ و انتشارات وزارت امور خارجه، ۱۳۷۳: ص ۵۱.
  15. ^ رستم‌الحکماء، محمدهاشم، رستم التواریخ، به تصحیح مهرآبادی، میترا، تهران: دنیای کتاب، ۱۳۸۲، ص ۳۵۰.
  16. ^ شیروانی، زین‌العابدین بن اسکندر، بستان السیاحه، تهران: سنایی، چاپ اول، ص ۳۰۳.
  17. ^ محمدجعفر خورموجی، تاریخ حقایق: حقایق الاخبار ناصری، به کوشش حسین خدیوجم، تهران: زوار، ۱۳۴۴، ص ۲۵۴.
  18. ^ محمد خالقی مقدم، آذربایجان در ادوار مختلف تاریخی، نشریه موج بیداری، شماره ۱۰۴، سه‌شنبه ۲ مرداد ۱۳۸۶، ص ۴.
  19. ^ ابوالحسن غفاری کاشانی، گلشن مراد، به اهتمام غلامرضا طباطبایی مجد، تهران: زرین، ۱۳۶۹.
  20. ^ کنت ژوزف آرتور گوبنیو، جنگ ترکمن یا آیینه تمام‌نمای اوضاع و احوال اجتماعی و اداری و کشوری و لشکری ایران در گذشته از زبان یک سرباز روستایی، ترجمۀ محمدعلی جمالزاده، تهران: جاویدان، ۱۳۵۷.
  21. ^ محمدرضا جوادی یگانه، ایرانی‌ای که بود، ایرانی‌ای که هست: درآمدی بر نگاه گوبینو به ایرانیان و زمینه‌های شکل‌گیری آن، فصلنامۀ تخصصی جستارهایی در جامعه‌شناسی تاریخی، مؤسسۀ مطالعات و تحقیقات اجتماعی دانشگاه تهران، سال اول، شماره دوم، پاییز و زمستان ۱۳۹۱، ص ۵۷.
  22. ^ کنت ژوزف آرتور گوبنیو، جنگ ترکمن، ترجمۀ محمدعلی جمالزاده، به کوشش علی دهباشی، تهران: نشر علم، ۱۳۹۹.
  23. ^ محمدحسن بن علی اعتماد السلطنه، مرآة البلدان‏، ۴ جلد، به تصحیح: عبدالحسین نوایی، هاشم محدث، جلد ۱، تهران: دانشگاه تهران، ۱۳۶۷، ص ۳۹.
  24. ^ افضل الملک، غلامحسین، افضل التواریخ، تهران: نشر تاریخ ایران، ۱۳۶۱، ص ۳۰۰.
  25. ^ پادشاه، محمد و محمد دبیرسیاقی (۱۳۳۶)، فرهنگ آنندراج، چاپ اول، تهران: خیام.
  26. ^ صفی پوری شیرازی، عبدالرحیم بن عبدالکریم (۱۳۹۰)، منتهی الارب فی لغه العرب، تصحیح و تعلیق: محمدحسن فؤادیان، علیرضا حاجیان نژاد، جلد اول، تهران: مؤسسه انتشارات دانشگاه تهران، شابک ۹۷۸-۹۶۴-۰۳-۵۸۴۹-۸.
  27. ^ زنجان،مؤسسۀ لغت‌نامۀ دهخدا و مرکز بین‌المللی آموزش زبان‌فارسی دانشگاه تهران، تاریخ بازبینی=۳۱ اکتبر ۲۰۲۱
  28. ^ عبدالله مستوفی، شرح زندگانی من، ۳ جلد، تهران: زوار، ۱۳۸۴، جلد ۳، ص ۴۳۲.
  29. ^ آقابزرگ تهرانی، محمدمحسن، طبقات أعلام الشیعة، جلد ۹، بیروت: دار إحیاء التراث العربی، ۱۴۳۰ قمری، ص ۲۵.
  30. ^ ادوین آرویدوویچ گرانتوفسکی، تاریخ ایران از زمان باستان تا امروز، ترجمهٔ کیخسرو کشاورزی، تهران: پویش، ۱۳۵۹، صص ۴۳۰ و ۴۹۴.
  31. ^ جعفری، عباس، فرهنگ گیتاشناسی، ۳/۴۷۹، تهران: موسسه جغرافیایی و کارتوگرافی گیتاشناسی.
  32. ^ گروهی از نویسندگان (۱۳۸۸)، سفرنامه‌های خطی فارسی، جلد ۴، تهران: نشر اختران، چاپ اول، ص ۲۵۸.
  33. ^ مریم میراحمدی، تاریخ سیاسی و اجتماعی ایران در عصر صفوی، تهران: مؤسسه انتشارات امیرکبیر، ۱۳۷۱، صص ۱۳۵، ۱۴۲-۱۴۱.
  34. ^ تبریز دانشنامه جهان اسلام، تاریخ بازدید: ۱۸ نوامبر ۲۰۲۱
  35. ^ جباری، ولی، شیعیان جمهوری آذربایجان، قم: شیعه‌شناسی، ۱۳۸۹، ص ۲۱۰.
  36. ^ بهرام امیراحمدیان، روابط ایران و جمهوری آذربایجان، تهران: انتشارات وزارت امور خارجه، ۱۳۸۴، ص ۳۲-۳۱.
  37. ^ رضایی، محمد، تاریخ تشیع در آذربایجان، قم: شیعه‌شناسی، ۱۳۸۵، صص ۱۵-۱۴.
  38. ^ فراهانی، حسن، روزشمار تاریخ معاصر ایران، جلد ۴، تهران: مؤسسه مطالعات و پژوهشهای سیاسی، ۱۳۸۵، ص ۴.
  39. ^ Frederik Coene (2009), THE CAUCASUS: an introduction, APPENDIX I: CONFUSING TERMS, New York: Routledge, 2009, pp. 256.

The name of the province(s) is Azarbaijan, not Azerbaijan.[edit]

The correct term as it is used in every official Iranian document is Azarbaijan, NOT Azerbaijan. Hence, I am wondering who changed the spelling and why? The Republic that was founded in 1918 uses the Turkic spelling "Azerbaijan", but Iran uses the correct, etymological spelling with "a". I suggest reverting the name to the officially used name of the province(s). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:1715:4E33:4130:3093:F0A:859E:188A (talk) 20:54, 3 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is Azarbaijan in Persian language, but this is English language article. The common way to spell the name is not always the same in multiple languages, like Russia and Russiye. PAper GOL (talk) 17:28, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 October 2022[edit]

2607:FA49:2842:2900:21B7:3527:F4E9:9C0E (talk) 00:26, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The study found that the Azerbaijanis of Iran do not have a similar FSt and other genetic markers found in Anatolian and European Turks. However, the genetic Fst and other genetic traits like MRca and mtDNA of Iranian Azeris were identical to Persians in Iran.(reference:,identical%20to%20Persians%20in%20Iran.)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —Sirdog (talk) 08:13, 29 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have a question[edit]

Why is it so that here in demographics it writes that "the azerbaijani people are largely iranic and minority caucasian in origin" while in the page about azerbaijanis turkic is also (rightfully) mentioned? SeljukK2 (talk) 20:21, 20 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Because Wikipedia is dominated by Arianists, iranists and they do all the tricks to undermine Azerbaijan. It’s all politically motivated (talk) 18:55, 19 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wrong flag displayed in this page[edit]

The flag displayed at the top of the page does not represent all Azerbaijanis. It is only the flag of the "country" of Azerbaijan which does not belong to Azeri people of Iran. Samythekid (talk) 15:12, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Samythekid: Well, I had reverted[19] the addition of the flag to the template (it was added by an IP). But user Helius Olympian reinstated it.[20] I agree it doesn't look WP:NPOV this way, if the template is supposed to remain on this page. - LouisAragon (talk) 20:30, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear LouisAragon, so what is the solution? The displayed flag belongs to country of Azerbaijan and not to Iranian Azeri people. The only flag representing Iranian people (whether they are Azeri or not) is the flag of Iran. Samythekid (talk) 11:07, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And you decide it? Beshogur (talk) 17:13, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Beshogur: This page is about a historical region in Iran, yet it displays the flag of a different country that was founded in 1918/1991. Its frankly ridiculous. While I disagree with user:Samythekid's "trust me bro"-ish claim, the question raised here is legitimate. - LouisAragon (talk) 16:58, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Latinisation of the Azerbaijani name[edit]

The page currently includes the Iranian Azerbaijani name آذربایجان, while also including the transliteration Āzerbāyjān.

It is difficult to find what standard this transliteration is based on, as the only latin-based form of the Azerbaijani alphabet known to me is the form officially used in the Republic of Azerbaijan, which renders the name as Azərbaycan. (There is an ALA-LC transliteration table for Azerbaijani, but it does not differ from the Persian in this case, and is thus unnecessary.)

If one is using the same scheme as used for the Persian transliteration, there is no reason to write it Āzerbāyjān rather than Āzarbāyjān, as that is neither consistent with writing nor pronunciation.

Āzerbāyjān's equivalent in the Arabic script Azerbaijani, in terms of pronunciation, would be آذئربایجان.

Unless there is a latinisation scheme for Azerbaijani in the Arabic script that I am unaware of, it would make most sense to simply use Azərbaycan or none at all. Samiollah1357 (talk) 03:48, 11 April 2023 (UTC); edited 05:04, 23 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Samiollah1357: Thank you for your response. Please read WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. Just because we don't have a proper Iranian Latinization of the name, doesn't mean we should resort to adding things that are not officially recognized. Adding the Latin transliteration of the Republic of Azerbaijan would tantamount to irredentist POV pushing, no different than adding the Perso-Arabic transliteration for articles related to the Republic of Azerbaijan, or Arabic script transliterations for articles related to Kurdish in Turkey. In the absence of a proper Latinization that is recognized for Iranian use, said transliterations should be removed. - LouisAragon (talk) 11:21, 11 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@LouisAragon, I agree that the transliteration is unnecessary and should be removed, especially as it is written identical to the Persian name in Arabic script Azerbaijani. I only added it back in reversion of a 28 August 2019 edit that (without any basis) originally changed it to Āzerbāyjān. I already explained earlier how Āzerbāyjān is a not a proper latinisation, as there exist no transliteration schemes for Arabic script Azerbaijan, asides from the official alphabet of the Republic of Azerbaijan. The only difference between the name in Azerbaijani and Persian is in pronunciation. Considering this, it may be possible to write the name in the same way Zabul Province's page does for Pashto and Persian.
I propose merging the Azerbaijani and Persian name sections (as they are identical in Arabic script) and only using the Persian transliteration (as there exists no transliteration scheme for Iranian-Azerbaijani), while maintaining separate pronunciation guides (due to slightly differing pronunciation). Samiollah1357 (talk) 17:40, 11 April 2023 (UTC); edited 05:05, 23 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Adding the Latin transliteration of the Republic of Azerbaijan would tantamount to irredentist POV pushing who says so? I disagree. Does Tabriz become Azerbaijan by adding a latinization? I am sure that 99% of readers of this page can not read Arabic, so what's the purpose of adding it without a proper transliteration? Beshogur (talk) 18:21, 11 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The latin script is not used in Iran thus we don't use it when it comes to Iranian cities/territories.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 03:14, 23 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You sure about that? Maybe look at various Kurdish populated areas, most of them have a latin transliteration. Like West Azerbaijan province and Mahabad, etc. This is hypocrisy. You don't create a false transliteration. Also comparing this to placing Perso-Arabic for Republic of Azerbaijan related articles isn't valid since this is English wikipedia, a latin alphabet based wikipedia. That's why we need a latin transliteration for every non-latin text. How are reader supposed to read them? Not everyone knows IPA either. Beshogur (talk) 06:40, 23 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello @Beshogur,
Unlike Kurdish, which is a fully phonetic alphabet, loanwords in Arabic-script Azerbaijani are usually written in their original form. This includes Azerbaijan, a word that originated from Persian. Thus, the transliterations are also the same for both languages.
Additionally, Kurdish transliteration schemes differ from the Kurmanji Kurdish Latin alphabet. For example, the BGN/PCGN transliteration of سپای ڕزگاری is Sipa-î Ṟizgarî. The letter R̄ is used for the ڕ letter, which does not have an equivalent in the Latin alphabets used for Kurdish, and a hyphen is added for the -î Ezāfe, which is not separated in Latin Kurdish writing.
In the same manner, transliterations of Arabic-script Azerbaijani differ from the Latin alphabet used for Caucasian Azerbaijani writing. This is because the Latin alphabet used for it was not based on what was written, but how it was pronounced. For example, as per the ALA-LC scheme, اعلامیّه is transliterated E‘lāmiyya, while in the Latin alphabet of Azerbaijani it is written Elamiyyə. The ʿayn is completely ignored, and it is thus not a proper transliteration of the Arabic script.
In the case of the word آذربایجان, Azerbaijan, the main topic of discussion here, it is transliterated identically in every transliteration scheme that exists for both Persian and Azerbaijani. There is thus no reason to separate the transliterations. As their pronunciations slightly differ, the IPA pronunciation guide is included to help with that. Samiollah1357 (talk) 19:48, 23 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 27 September 2023[edit]

Change the description of the map from "Three provinces of Iranian Azerbaijan region" to "Three or four provinces of Iranian Azerbaijan region, depending on the political acceptation of Zanjan province as part of Azerbaijan" AkaneoMT (talk) 09:31, 27 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done You need to provide cites for such a change.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 10:24, 27 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]