Talk:Gundeshapur

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Requested move

The article talks about the Persian city and that there was an academy; it focuses on the intellectual heritage of the city. Besides, there is more that can be said about the city and it seems pointless to create a new artcle for that purpose

[edit] Voting

  • Support MrPMonday 04:06, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose Zora 05:02, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
  • tentative Oppose academy and city are two different things. who knows, maybe they will find more about the city in the future, we shouldn't overcomplicate the matter. Gryffindor 10:53, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

The Academy and the city where it was located are logically distinguishable. Instead of a move, we could have a split. All material relating to the city goes to Gundishapur (city) and the rest stays in the Academy. Zora 05:02, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Descision

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved.

Request was to move to Gundishapur. WhiteNight T | @ | C 10:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Zora's edit, and Vansibin

One editor just added a long essay on the superiority of Persian culture which is far, far from NPOV. I don't have time to rewrite just now -- I've spent a long day driving visitors about the city -- but it needs to be done. Zora 07:54, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

I dont think the NPOV tag is necessary. Just rewrite the section. It's no big deal.--Zereshk 17:19, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Zora,

Since you took the trouble to edit the entire article instead of just that section, is it OK if I ask you to restore some of the info that you deleted which I think is pertinent, such as the mentioning of Vansibin as well as Zeidan's writings? Or did you perhaps have a particular reason to delete such info? Thanx.--Zereshk 18:42, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Deleted because I was trying to streamline, but I may have erred in leaving those things out. I googled extensively on Gundishapur and didn't find either Vansibin or Zeidan mentioned -- however, it's likely that you have access to material in Persian that hasn't made it into English yet. Let me do some googling and fact-checking, and I'll get back to you if I can't find anything. Thanks very much for approaching this in a collaborative spirit! Zora 20:38, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
I find ONE glancing mention of Vansibin in English, on an Iranian site. All other mentions are just mirrors of the cite in the Wikipedia article. Georgi Zeidan seems to have been a late 19th century historian/writer of historical fiction, not the best or most recent source. There might be more on these topics in your older paper copy of the Encyclopedia Iranica -- they're not covered in the online Iranica. I also found what seems to be the previous version of the Wikipedia article in various websites run by Manuchehr Noury, with his name attached as author. Is he plagiarizing the Wikipedia article, or is the Wikipedia article plagiarizing him? This is distressing -- I'm worried that more extensive rewriting will be necessary, to remove copyvio. Zora 21:11, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
The sources I used were indeed Persian. I did a superficial search in some books at my library, but did not find anything on Vansibin. (not surprising of course, considering that the west's current perspective on Iranian history is obsolete by 25 years). I did however find a mention on the webpage of the University of Tehran. Im very busy nowadays moving to Texas. Cant find the time to spend on WP much anymore.--Zereshk 18:07, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
Update: "Jurji Zaydan" is an Arabic literature historian. He is mentioned in Edward Browne's Islamic Medicine, p94 ISBN 8187570199.--Zereshk 03:49, 30 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Boasting

It's not clear that Gundishapur was the most important medical center in the world in the 6th and 7th centuries. How would you measure that? I removed this boast. I also removed quote re Persia inventing modern medicine, or suchlike. "Persia" is an abstraction. "Persia" can't do a darn thing. The achievement belongs to an enlightened monarch and a bunch of smart people, all of whom are now DEAD. In a wider sense, it's an example of what humans can do.

Zereshk, you didn't reply to the copyvio question. I'm taking that as a tacit admission that the article is a copvio, and will do more rewriting. Zora 22:43, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

  1. As was the case for Elam, and every other persian page you have been trying to destroy with your biased edits, it is not uncommon for people to take material out of WP that I wrote, and publish it in an article under their name. After all, I have published alot of crap. If you are talking about this guy, then yes, he got his stuff from here, because some of the sentences of his text were written by me. You can verify this by checking the history of the page. I, first talked about Borzouyeh and the current ajums hospital. His 3rd and last paragraphs are directly from material I first wrote. He even mentions Georgy Zeidan (i.e. he copied it off of my probably incorrect transcription. His name is pronounced Jorji Zaydan in Arabic. The spelling "Georgy Zeidan" was only my guess. That's why you couldnt find anything on him). But Mr. Noury seems to have added stuff to what I wrote as well. I dont mind him copying my stuff. He's doing people a service by educating them.
  2. There is hardly anything left of the page for you to re-edit. Each section has only 2 or 3 paragraphs.
  3. I also recall the ajums website itself mentioning Vansibin. Unfortunately, the page where they mentioned it is currently broken linked.--Zereshk 05:55, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] One more reason why Google should not be a research tool

Contrary to what google hits say almost unanimously, Vansibin was not in Khuzestan, but farther up northwest, in the current Iraq-Syria region. It was then part of the Persian Empire. I finally found a mention of it in Donald Hill's book. He spells it "Nisibīn". The "Vansibin" word is a Persian equivalent. Same thing. I'm updating the article.--Zereshk 05:45, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Citation from New Delhi lecture

Zereshk, if you're going to INSIST on using this article to go "Persia, Persia, rah rah rah!" then I'm going to add the nationalism link. You aren't any bigger, or more important, because of something that people did several centuries ago. Who you are is what YOU have done.

I also removed the link you added to a lecture at a New Delhi university. The speaker is exalting Islamic homeopathic medicine and Islamic civilization in a public lecture full of boasting and hyperbole. I would agree that Islamic scholars, including scholars at Gundishapur and later in Baghdad, preserved various works that would otherwise have been lost. But they weren't the only ones! Much was also preserved in Byzantium, and taken to Europe by scholars who fled the fall of Constantinople. The quote is not a credible claim, or a credible source. Zora 06:38, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm only giving credit where it is due. Just as Vienna is the heart of classical music,
Italy and France would disagree, sharply.
OK. Let me try again: Flamenco music primarily comes from Spain. The piano was an invention of the Italians....every nation has its list of achievements. so does Persia!
or Germany (Bauhaus) where modern architecture was conceived,
Frank Lloyd Wright?
FLW isnt exactly modernist. His later works in fact devaited so sharply from MA, that many modernists dismissed him altogether. But again, youre doging the point: Every country has a list of achievements. Example. And Iran's is still largely unknown. Get it?
Achievements of German scientists, impossible without which?
Incorrect. Chicago is where the atomic age was born. No ifs, ands, or buts. And Fermi is the father of the Atomic age. Not any German. So there were a ton of foreigners in the Manhattan proj. But hey, what the hell do you think America is anyway? A MELTING POT! Helloooo!

so does Persia have its proud achievements.

The human race has achievements, anything less that that is parochialism.
Yes. But to selectively mention one nation's achievments while suppressing and expunging others from memory is ethnocentric, if not racist. That's why we have books by Gheverghese being taught at universities. So that racists like you will stop trying to erase the memory and contribution of others from the history of academic achievement.

Im sorry, but I cant let you take that away, no matter how hard you try to censor the existence of Persia with your "nationalism" pretext.

I don't give a flying whatsahoozi about Persia in particular -- I'd protest anything that smacked of jingoism, no matter what nation. Including the US of A.
Youre lying. You would give your whatsahoozi to ensure that Sunni Arab or Buddhist heritage is fully explored and introduced to the world. Theres a big difference between jingoism, and protecting a dwindling heritage from oblivion.
PS, I only provided the "New Delhi" link so that you wont throw me the Persian nationalist crap (which you did anyway, he he).--Zereshk 08:09, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
Gol darn it, Zereshk, Wikipedia is not the Olympics, with every nation trying for firsts and bests and gold medals. I own Gundishapur and you own Wile's proof of Fermat's Last Theorem. And vice-versa. Zora 10:02, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
Im sorry Zora. You can huff and puff as much as you want. The facts will remain, and I will be there to make sure that people hear that Persia was a great civilization, just like the Indians, Egyptians, Mesopotamians, and Chinese. (only Persia has not had its fair share of publicity, because of people like you. Have you ever wondered why there are tons of books on Egypt or Greece or China on bookshelves in your Barnes and Noble store, and not even a few books on Persia? No really. Did you even bother and notice? Or were you too busy drooling with some aspect of Indian culture that has been safely and fully transmitted to you?). Im truly sorry that you have no clue about culture and its significance, specially that of Persia. Globalization does not apply to culture and heritage.
You can try to help me convey the story of Persia, and familiarize the westerner with what a great civilization it once was. (just like youve done for other nations).
Or you can choose to remain ignorant and hostile toward Iran and her history. Hey, its the latest fad! Hating Iranians and looking at them as camel riding retrogrades with no culture and history is so cool nowadays! Yipeeee.--Zereshk 11:10, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Response to vote oppositions

Its true, the academy did dominate the city in terms of significance, but there are other historical resources we can draw upon to discuss the city. I also see no need to split the article, there's nothing wrong with having one thorough and comprehensive article on either subject really. If the vote decides that the article name should remain, then the article shold be cleaned up. Right now it begins:

The Academy of Gundishapur (...) was the intellectual center of the Sassanid empire. Its Academy offered training...

How does an academy have an academy? There are several points in the article in which the subject is confused in the middle of the sentence. No matter what the verdict is on the name, we should make the article lucidly discuss either the City in the context of the Academy, or the Academy in the context of the City. The section The Rise of Gundishapur talks about the city, while Significance of Gundishapur talks about the academy, while Gundishapur Under Muslim Rule talks about both. No formal distinction is made.

I suppose thats the real issue, that the article needs to be clarified, and based on the content it can be about either the city or the academy. MrPMonday 16:57, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Split article (Seperate city from academia)

I split the article into Gundeshapur and Academy of Gundishapur. I'm not very happy with the different names, but "Gundeshapur" returned more results in Google (2.600, whereas most other common variants returned around 900).

Why did I split? It seemed that a lot of the article was about the city, not the academy (i.e. it was the site of the death of mani, it was founded by so-and-so, etc.).

I do agree that it's pretty hard to seperate the history of the city from that of the academy. I tried to do that, but left a fair bit of duplicate material. A rewrite of both may be in order.

Alternatively, everything could be left in the article on the city. Either one would be fine, I just don't think it was right to have the history of the city in the article on the academy. What do you think? Flammifer 07:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../g/u/n/Talk%7EGundeshapur_fd33.html"