Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Fazeri

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is a discussion on the talk page and additional references relevant to the subject. Topic about the linguistic and cultural abuse of identity against at least 16 million people cannot be non-noteable.Atabek (talk) 18:26, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

There is no discussion. It is just you opposing a violation of WP:neologism and me pointing it out. All the other discussions are not relavent to the topic at hand and discuss history, other countries, much intrepretation and many other topics which have no relationship with the term. And topics with regards to ethnic minorities in Iran are in ethnic minorities in Iran, Iranian Azeris, Human rights in Iran and other articles. So the additional issue you allege are already discussed in several other articles. Since non-notability and violation of WP:OR, WP:neologism are obvious and we did not get anywhere, I will only discuss the matter with someone new. --alidoostzadeh (talk) 18:36, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

That's not what the size of your talk page posts show - it's obviously a big discussion. There is a need for an article about ongoing linguistic and cultural assimilation and ethnocide against Azerbaijanis in Iran, just like there is an article Human rights of Kurdish people in Turkey. I would like the administrators to understand the sensitivity of the topic: "Fazeri" is essentially a new language established by Iranian authorities using purely Persian vocabulary and Azeri Turkic grammar. The purpose of it is to isolate Azeri language in Iran from rest of Turkic languages, make it mutually unintelligible with current Azeri speakers, and turn it into so called Ancient Azari language, in reality called Old Tati dialect of Persian. Again the objective is clear, ethnic assimilation of quarter of Iranian Azeri Turkic population. This is by far very sophisticated but notable technique of assimilation, outlined by human rights and Amnesty International activist.

So I propose renaming the Fazeri article to Situation with Azeri language in Iran or Human rights of Azeri Turks in Iran. The topic has sufficient references from various human rights bodies to deserve a separate subject article in Wikipedia. And we can still incorporate "Fazeri" subject into it, without trying to just get rid of Fakhteh Zamani references. Atabek (talk) 18:58, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Now you are doing a bigger mistake. Ethnocide is a big word. If you accuse Iranian authorities (of which I am not a fan either) of ethnocide, then you should come up with facts and arguments. All facts and arguments conradict your claims. And moreover were discussed elsewhere and are not related to this article. The only way one can think of this article as being woth to keep is if it is compared with Ruseri (The Russianized Azeri of rep. Azerbaijan). I do not think that you like that option either.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 20:28, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

And that's precisely why, I suggested renaming the article while keeping it. The article subject is substantial to be deleted simply on the grounds of few contributors disagreeing with Canadian Iranian activist Fakhteh Zamani.Here is another relevant article from Eurasianet, confirming that Fakhteh Zamani recently participated even in U.S. Congressional hearings on the situation of Azeri, Kurdish, Baluchi and other minorities. So if U.S. Congress listens to Fakhteh Zamani, not sure why for Wikipedia, she would be unnotable, just because Ali Doostzadeh or yourself consider it so. Atabek (talk) 20:46, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

you too recently had lunch or dinnher with "important"people, does this mean that we should agree whith whatever you say? See your email. I did there some suggestion which are not suitable for wikipedia discussion.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 20:54, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Atabek, grouping users by their background is not acceptable. So that is just warning, but next time trying to show this battle ground mentality with reference to the users background will be reported to the admin. Besides the fact that many of the votes are from non-involved parties who see the clear violation of WP:neologism, WP:SOAP and WP:OR. And many people meet with presidential candidates, congressmen, senators and etc. Reread WP:neologism. --alidoostzadeh (talk) 21:10, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Ali, I am not simply grouping users by background. First nomination for deletion was made by User:Alborz Fallah - [1], the second one by yourself - [2]. The one who started attacking Fakhteh Zamani in the article and debating above by retaliating with "Razeri" is User:Babakexorramdin - [3]. So I don't see any intentional grouping made here by myself, the links are provided.

And Ali, I think it would be more productive if you concentrated (preferrably on talk page) on disputing why an article with several references, which can indeed be kept, renamed and expanded, should be simply deleted. Instead you're making sideline threats of reporting me (for nth time now) or citing Wikipedia policies which do not at all reflect why you wanted this particular article to be deleted in first place. Atabek (talk) 21:16, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

None of the references have any relation with the word, and that is why WP:neologism exists, so OR does not occur with reference to a neologism. I will just make a point from it: The use of neologisms should be avoided in Wikipedia articles because they are not well understood, are not clearly definable, and will have different meanings to different people. Determining which meaning is the true meaning is not only impossible, it is original research as well—we don't do that here at Wikipedia. So my intrepretation of the term is the poetry of Nasimi and Fizuli, and Khatai and what Swietchowski has called a heavily Iranized artificial idiom. Your intrepretation is different. If you want to create articles, it can not violate WP:neologism. And I have no choice now to report you, so at least you don't use terms "few Iranian contributors" which is a comment on the background of the users and not the content and leads to a battle ground mentality. --alidoostzadeh (talk) 21:23, 16 April 2008 (UTC)