User talk:Mtheory1
An invitation to the Teahouse![edit]
|
Welcome![edit]
Hello, Mtheory1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. As well, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.
If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! (ƒî)» 09:06, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Hello and thank you for helping me! Yes, I am new to Wikipedia, and I will next time use sources for my edits. I will do those now, I am sorry I did not know about this.
Your recent edits[edit]
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button 
or 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 06:04, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Re:[edit]
If dicussion does not work (and it obviously does not), you shoudl contact an admin and ask for help. --Lysozym (talk) 22:04, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Just a thought[edit]
You should realize that the countries that are a part of Western Asia are ASIAN, hence the word- ASIA! Also, almost all of your sources for placing Iran in South Asia are incorrect- National Geographic places Iran in Western Asia, as do most scholars. South Asia TRADITIONALLY refers to the Indian tectonic plate- of which Iran is NOT a part of. The Indian tectonic plate consists of India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and the Sindh/Punjab provinces of Pakistan (both of these provinces constitute a majority of Pakistan's population, with cities like Karachi and Lahore) . Afghanistan is considered to be a Central Asian country, with heavy South Asian influences due to its long Pakistani border. Iran, however, is a primarily WEST ASIAN country- Northeastern regions, and Southeastern areas, could be placed in Central Asia- due to ties with Turkmenistan and Southern Afghanistan/Pakistan, respectively. Western Pakistan and Afghanistan are GEOGRAPHICALLY Central Asian as well. Iran is defined by the Zagros and Elburz mountains, which are part of the Caucasus- Anatolian mountain "region"- therefore, most of Iran's populace has closer ties to the Caucasus and Northern West Asia- which are NOT ARAB SPEAKING- mostly Turkish, Azeri, Kurdish, and Persian related groups. Notice, all of these areas ARE ASIAN''''.
As MOST of Iran lives in the North and West, the cuisine also has a very Caucasus- inspired taste- less spices! Breads such as Lavash are also primarily Armenian/Azeri. However, it does have a very Mediterranean flavour, due to geographic proximity. Tehran, Esfahan, Tabriz, Hamadan, and Mashhad are located in either the West or Northern parts of Iran, and have either more Caucasian, West Asian, or Central Asian "flair". Most Iranians come from regions surrounding these cities. Therefore, Iranian culture is a mixture of Caucasus, Central Asia, and West Asia, with more influence from one or the other depending on the region. Due to very little populace living in Southeastern Iran, South Asian cultural influences- from the plains of India and Pakistan- are practically non-existant in MOST of Iran, except for Baluchistan. Iranian culture did heavily influence the Ottomans and Mughals, however, and similarities between Iranian and South Asian cuisine and culture do exist due to the Mughal culture. Same goes for Turkey, and countries ruled by the Ottomans, who were also extremely Persianized.
If you are an Iranian, it is most likely that you also have Azeri ancestors, who are thoroughly part of the Caucasus' cultural quilt, and have EXTREMELY close ties to their brethren in neighboring Anatolia/Turkey. Kurds, who constitute a large part of Iran, also live in neighboring Turkey and Northern Iraq. The southeasternly Baluchis, however, who could be Iran's closest tie to South Asia, do not constitute a large part of Iran's ethnic community. Iran is a primarily Persian, Kurdish, and Turkish/Azeri nation. Even the Persians have great admixture with the Turks, Kurds, and even Arabs. Therefore, it can be said that Iran is a West Asian country, with significant Central Asian and Caucasian influences. YES!! ASIAN- but West/Central Asian, as Iran is NORTH of the Arab regions of West Asia.
MAP OF ASIA from National Geo.- the UN geoscheme is not based on proper geographic and cultural facts- even many of the UN's departments don't use the UN geoscheme, as it incorrectly regionalizes many countries, and causes confusion. Makers of the geoscheme have admitted its faults, and are working to fix it.""
Various universities' departments of South Asian Studies also, by and large, reject the idea that Iran is part of South Asia.
If you are Baluchi (2% of Iran's populace), you could consider yourself Central/South Asian. ANYTHING ELSE, your are either Western Asian, Central Asian, or Caucasian.
Also-Afghanistan's Persian speakers are Tajiks, or Hazara. The Tajiks are Uzbeks, Bactrians, and Sogdians who learned to speak Persian as the Turkic leaders of Central Asia spoke Persian in court. Same with Hazaras, who originate from Mongols and Turkic groups. When people say PERSIAN, in terms of an ethnic group, they refer to any Persian speaker who claims descent from the province of Fars- however, as the Persians- meaning Iranian Persian speakers- intermarried HEAVILY with Arabs and Turks, there is no real meaning of Persian. Calling an Afghan Persian is like calling a Chinese person English, just because he speaks the language. Genetic testing has proven that the difference between peoples living across the Dasht-e-Lut and Dasht-e-Kavir in Eastern Iran is very significant. Populations east of these deserts have more Central Asian influence, however, the MAJORITY of Iran lives to the north and west of these deserts, and have greater genetic affinity to the populations of the Caucasus, Anatolia, and Northern Mesopotamia.
User "Ordibehesht"[edit]
"No problem in regards to the 3RR. I'll refrain from it next time. However, i will be back on Wednesday to continue to neutralize the disruptive POV campaign being waged against Iran-related articles here by a handful of vulgar Afghans. A rather pathetic and futile effort by these strange individuals. Day by day, no matter how long as it takes, any POV campaign against Iran-related articles here will be neutralized."-quote User talk:اردیبهشت.
- Afghani people are not "vulgar." They are kind. Intelligent. Great people. I am Iranian (born in Qa'emshahr) and I see that in them. I am glad this person has been blocked from this editing.
Mtheory1 (talk) 08:22, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Response to "Just a Thought."[edit]
I will be back with an in-depth analysis of "Just a Thought" with "Just a Reasonable Thought." As an Iranolgist, it will take time for me to gather some information. I'll do it later on soon. But I LOVE this person's analysis. But, I must address some serious assertions.
Just a small Thought[edit]
Just to clarify Iran's MULTIPLE regional positionS
I WILL analyse this page and present my opinions later (I am tired:) ). You are very knowledgable and I agree with you, but Iranologists like myself and my colleagues are starting to diverge from some of the things this person attests, he/she must have learned online. The job of an Iranologist is not to create defined barriers and "majority" labels for Iran, but to identify such barriers and the relations such barriers have amongst one another. I will be back with further analysis. Remember, what you say about majorities is correct, but the historians and scholars in fields similar to this wish to recognize ALL the areas of the world a country contributes to: culturally, genetically (pools), politically, etc... I will try to cover all these pieces of analysis in my explanation as simply as I can. Remember also, genetics is not the BEST way of understanding definitions of cultures. Understand that the majority of West Asia is Semetic, and an extremely tiny percentage of Iran and Central Asia (both Persian to the core and very closely aligned gentically) are Semetic. This is why it is NOT West Asian in any form, because for years, Iranian people themselves have rejected the culture and issues of that part of the world. Iran is erroneously placed in the middle east, and it's actually funny because the word keeps expanding. Pretty soon, Kashi (part of Xinjiang, China) will be middle eastern! Anyways, to make a long explanation short (I tend to babble), Iran can be BEST described as South-Central Asian, but not West. It is incorrect in MANY ways, and also does an injustice to Iranians who, quite honestly, do not even wish to be thought of as such. Being attacked by people of this area has major perceptional impacts on a culture, and this cannot be overlooked for Iranians. The "majority" you are speaking of is actually (genetically, culturally, everything else really :) ) of Iran is actually more-so related to Turkey, and just because Turks don't have Mongoloid features, does not mean they are NOT Turkic. A great percentage of Iranian genetic pool is Turkic, and the Persians are descendants of a province called Fars, which the people thereof migrated northeastward, towards the "stans" we know now today. The fact that Afghans speak heavy Persian has absolutely nothing to do wuth your comment: "calling a Chinee person English." The Persian langage has been infused in the culture of Afghanistan (and all the "stans" for lack of a better term) for years longer than English has been in Chinese language, so this connection is erroneous. OK. I will also attach some DNA tests from a friend of mine, and you will see distinct "corridors" of genetic pools Iran creates. The Iranians WERE an Insular people, but NOT a non-migratory people. They moved about, taking their culture, langage, and genes with them. The only genetic relation they have with Semetic peoples (Arabs, etc) is through war and rape crimes, and this is not much. Many Persians mated with Turks, and many voluntary since the peoples of Turks (who migrated from C Asia, Southwards into Iran) were fascinated by the culture, etc. Yes, I am interchanging the words Persian and Iranian quite often, but it really does not matter considering thatthey are all so genetically aligned with one another. I will continue my analysis later. I am very tired. But great job in what you have so far. Really, you are an intelligent person.
Oh and although you keep saying Iran is absolutely NOT S Asian as a majority, how do you think enormous abundances of Sanskrit (proto-Indo) came into our language(s)? Does that not have an influence on where we are "located"?
Mtheory1 (talk) 08:58, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
To MTheory1[edit]
I applaud your great insight into this issue(something that really should not even be an issue!). By calling Iran South Asian, more so than West Asian, you are forced to cherry pick certain similarities that exist due to the advent of Muslim Turkic groups. Also, by just calling Iran JUST Central Asian, then what about Turkey, which you claim is one of Iran's most similar neighbors? Is Turkey also fully Central Asian? Iran's culture is a bridge between the Caucasus, West Asia, and Central Asia, with an outlying factor in South Asia. As I have stated previously, South Asia mainly refers to the Indian Subcontinent, which Iran is ABSOLUTELY NOT a part of. This fact is proven geographically, and genetically, and can't be disproven. However, the similarities between Iran and the Indian Subcontinent are there, mainly due to Mughal rule. However, nowadays, South Asia had expanded, and sometimes includes Afghanistan, especially since the British Raj- due to its long Pakistani border and the Pashtun tribes scattered along it. Just because WIkipedia says Afghanistan's citizens are Persians does NOT mean it is correct! I have already explained this in my earlier post. The main region of Afghanistan that has Iranian ( AS IN THE COUNTRY- IRAN) influence is the province of Herat, which has a mixture of Central Asian and Iranian culture. It is not a coincidence that the South Asian influence ever present in Afghanistan is miniscule in Herat! Even then, the citizens of Herat can not be considered Persian, but Tajik, due to their Uzbek, Sogdian, and Bactrian ancestry. Remember, in talking about Afghanistan, we are speaking of ethnic issues that have caused a 30 year civil war that killed millions of Afghans! By the way- just to clarify, the term "Afghan" refers to the Pashtuns who mainly live in Southeastern Afghanistan.
You also seem to not understand my point in one of my silly statements- "Saying an Afghan is Persian is like calling a Chinese person English, just because he speaks the language". By this, I meant that if a Chinese person started to ONLY speak the English language, while still living in China, he would not call himself English, in terms of ethnicity!
One must realize that the only reason Persian exists is due to the Turkic groups that invaded Iran and Anatolia! They revived the Persian language after years of Arab rule. Khorasan, a province of Iran (this province should be considered Central Asian!) in many ways led this revival of Persian. Therefore, as the Turkic leaders spoke this revived Persian, they forced many of their new conquered peoples to speak it, particularly in what is now Northern Afghanistan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. This region of Central Asia had many ancient learned cities, such as Samarqand, and they welcomed the use of Persian as a language of literature and art. Same goes for the Persianized Ottomans and Mughals. Some ROYAL intermarriage may have happened, but, as a whole, the Persians of Central Iran and the Zagros liked to stay put, due to fears of attack by the scary invaders!
The Turks of Iran- primarily the Azeris- are an Oghuz Turkish group closely related to their brethren in Anatolia, and have intermarried heavily with local Pontic Greek, Kurdish, Persian, Armenian, Georgian, e.t.c groups. They also have some Arab intermarriages.
Central Asia is not Persian-speaking as a majority EITHER, only Tajikistan and parts of Afghanistan are. Central Asia is inhabited by the easternly Turkic groups, such as the Kipchaq and other subsets of the Turkic languages. They do have Persian influences, however. Kashi (or Kashgar) is a Uyghur speaking city in Western China, and is Turkic- again, with Persian influences.
Iran is MORE one of the other for a person coming from a particular region! However, MOST Iranians come from regions that have more influence from Central Asia, West Asia, or the Caucasus, as compared to South Asia.
Turkey can also place itself in Iran's shoes, as both have enormous amounts of Oghuz Turkic and Western Iranic ethnic groups! And, Turkey is not semitic either, neither is Northern Syria and Iraq, which are Kurdish. So, are there regions South Asia JUST because they are not semitic?
Also, as I have stated previously, the Dasht-e-Lut and the Dasht-e-Kavir of Eastern Iran provide a genetic barrier. West of this, there is more alignment with the Caucasus, Anatolia, and Northern Mesopotamia (Syrian and Iraqi Kurdistan). East, there is more Central Asian influence.
The Turks who invaded Iran and Anatolia went through great cultural assimilation! Originally, they were most likely mongoloid, but with heavy admixture with the peoples living in Northern West Asia, they lost many of these features. The Turkmen of Northeastern Iran, however, still often retain these features.
Again, by EMPHASIZING Iran's South Asian similarities, instead of West Asia, you are forgetting about a majority of Iran! EMPHASIZE that Iran is West and Central Asian, with South Asian influence in its Southeast.
Ancient Persian had Sanskrit COGNATES, as both are Indo-European! In actuality, it would be easier for a Sanskrit person to learn LATIN, than Hindi, as Old Persian, Ancient Greek, Ancient Latin, and Sanskrit were very similar! Also, Ancient Persian was written in cuneiform, which shows great Mesopotamian influence. The ancient Persian cities of Persepolis, Pasargadae, Ecbatana, Ctesiphon (now in Iraq), and the Behistun Inscription show much similarity to Mesopotamian architecture. The ancient city of Susa in Iran was also created by Roman architects, as this city was under Roman rule.
If you are a Baluchi, then I understand why you would prefer Iran to be South Asian, however, if not, you would not be considered South Asian. Remember, we are talking of the majority! We should not cherry pick!
Snippets of Responses[edit]
- Neighnouring countries, all over the world, share similarities in culture, language, and also cuisine. Of course Iran - and the entire Iranian world, which also includes countries like Afghanistan - have a lot common with neighbouring cultures, such as those of India ("India" is just a Western name for a large sub-continent as big and as diverse as Europe!) or Anatolia. "Kebab" is not an Iranian or Persian invention, it is part of the larger Mesopotamian cuisine and has a much older history than Persia or Iran. In fact, not even the word "Kebab" is Persian. One of the main dishes of the entire Iranian world - from Baghdad to Badakhshan - is rice, an important import from India. The more one moves to the east, the more similarities one can find with India or other Asian countries (that includes the universial Asian dish Mantu which originated in Iranian Sogdia and was exported by the Turks and Mongols as far as Korea where it is known as Mandu and Anatolia where it is known as Manti). And the more one moves to the West, the more one can find similarities with Arab countries. The "Afghan cuisine" is in fact a mix of the different peoples that lives in that country: the cuisine of Herat is very similar to that of eastern Iran, the cuisine of kabul is spicy like Indian food. Anyone who denies this eclectic nature of Iranian culture is either uneducated or has inferiority complexes. The Iranian and Indian world have a lot a common, not only in culture and language. Iran has taken as much from India as it has given to India. --Lysozym (talk) 19:26, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Lysozym is absolutely correct. اردیبهشت and only ONE other user are using words like "POV" and whatever to cover up their actions, accusing others of "vandalism" when he/she is vandal him/herself. I am not saying Iran is not "related" to M East, but Iranians are NOT Semetic, and THEREFORE NOT WEST ASIAN. The oNLY relation we have with that part of the world is political, unfair, and the invasions that have been brought upon us. We have ALWAYS pushed away from EVERYTHING from W Asia, and have welcomed our Central Asian (almost 40% of Iran is Turkic, second largest populations) and S Asian (we have MANY commonalities through language [Proto-Into-Sanskirt words and cognates] and foods) cultures. Mtheory1 (talk) 21:11, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Lysozym is correct in his reasoning. Iran is an amalgamation of Central Asian and West Asian cultures, with South Asian influences due to the reign of the Persianized Mughals in the Indian Subcontinent. Again, in speaking of the MAJORITY of Iran, the populace of Iran lives in the North and West, therefore, similarities with Anatolia, the Caucasus, NORTHERN West Asia and Central Asia are more common than those with South Asia. However, even similarities between Iran and South Asia in terms of culture exist. Even then, if an Iranian from Tabriz, Isfahan, or Tehran were to meet a Turk from Adana, and an Pakistani from Lahore, the Iranian would find more similarities with the Turk. However, this mainly refers to the majority of Iran that lives in its North and West.
And another thing! The "Iranian World" that is being constantly spoken of is slightly ridiculous. Including ALL of Afghanistan and Tajikistan in the "Iranian World" is not in accordance with fact. The "Iranian World" mainly consists of Iran, Azerbaijan, Armenia, parts of Georgia, the Russian Caucasus, Eastern and Northeastern Anatolia, Northern Mesopotamia, and Northwestern Afghanistan.
Also, Proto-Indo-Sanskrit does not exist! Proto-Indo-European does, however! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moonstone1889 (talk • contribs) 01:52, 2 August 2012 (UTC) (Below is a response from some administrator, perhaps)
- Now, as to the discussion itself, basically, everything you two say above doesn't belong here. Wikipedia, including article talk pages and project talk pages, is not a place of scholarly debate. You are both making arguments about language, culture, cuisine, ethnicity, history, etc. None of that is relevant. Instead, the way that we decide what goes in articles is to look at what reliable sources say. If the majority of reliable sources say that Iran is in SOuth Asia, then that's how our articles should describe it. If the majority say its in Central Asia, then that's how we describe it. IF there is a serious debate among scholars, then our articles should describe that debate, giving appropriate weight to each side. What we are absolutely forbidden from doing, per WP:OR, is from making arguments about what is or isn't true. So I recommend that instead of continuing this debate, you look for reliable sources (in this case, books or articles by respected historians and geographers, along with high level political documents, will be the best place to look). 06:20, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- You are absolutely right. I had I no idea we weren't aloud to do WP:OR. A lot of these analysis are not only my own research, but that of others here in our department (in Iran) and other places. I am very sorry. However, because Wikipedia even has articles that contain information where Iran is EVERPRESENT in S Asia, C Asia, and even W Asia, I think it is right to not just "cherry pick" (in the name of Moonstone) a majority, but list them all. WHat about the Balochi? The Khorasani? I am from Khorasan, and my family has CONSIDERABLE C Asian influence/genetic affinity. In fact, I have family from Mazandaran who look Korean! (Mongoloid features). So it is not fair to pick one label, but is scholarly and justifiable and verifiable to put all of them. That's all I am saying. I agree with all peoples on this forum and a grateful for people like these who care enough about Iran to write responses. But we can all compromise by not agreeing on one un-exact majority and agreeing on a correct, all-encompassing phrase: Iran is Central, Western, and Southern Asian. Thank you for your time. You are all very intelligent people. I value that.
- Now, as to the discussion itself, basically, everything you two say above doesn't belong here. Wikipedia, including article talk pages and project talk pages, is not a place of scholarly debate. You are both making arguments about language, culture, cuisine, ethnicity, history, etc. None of that is relevant. Instead, the way that we decide what goes in articles is to look at what reliable sources say. If the majority of reliable sources say that Iran is in SOuth Asia, then that's how our articles should describe it. If the majority say its in Central Asia, then that's how we describe it. IF there is a serious debate among scholars, then our articles should describe that debate, giving appropriate weight to each side. What we are absolutely forbidden from doing, per WP:OR, is from making arguments about what is or isn't true. So I recommend that instead of continuing this debate, you look for reliable sources (in this case, books or articles by respected historians and geographers, along with high level political documents, will be the best place to look). 06:20, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Mtheory1 (talk) 02:13, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
- You both are right! Even then, as I stated previously, if an Iranian from Tabriz, Isfahan, or Tehran were to meet a Turk from Adana, and an Pakistani from Lahore, the Iranian would find more similarities with the Turk. However, this mainly refers to the majority of Iran that lives in its North and West. We should generally look at the majority of a certain populace, as they are the main factor of a nation. The Southeasternly Baluchis are ONLY 2% of Iran! The Khorasan province is CENTRAL Asian! Therefore, we are looking at more of a Central and West Asian nation, when speaking of Iran. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moonstone1889 (talk • contribs) 02:34, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Response to Moonstone (great insight)[edit]
You have great insight, Moonstone, but I have to address a few things. I was very tired when I wrote my other message, so I am laughing now when I said Proto-Into-Sanskrit, I meant Indo-European. First off, for many many years, WAY before the Mughals, there was Persian (and great ones) influence and culture aligned with Eastern neighbors (India, and Central Asia). Don't look at little Iran now; look at enormous Iran of yesterday, whose empire had amassed huge lands, and many times bordered the other great Asian empire of the two, the empires of China. Mainly from Proto-Indo-Iranian language, is the main way we gave to India linguistically as we received. Take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_peoples#Genetics, a wikipedia article. You will see that a famous geneticist by the name of L. L. Cavalli-Sforza (who we collaborate with at time) explains our divergence with other Near-Eastern cultures. When you speak of Mesopotamia (or even remotely speak of Iraq or West of Iran), the ONLY relation we have with them is (1) when the brought Islam (thousands of years AFTER Persia had established its "nation") and (2) Kurds. The Kurds, unlike other Persian groups (part of Iranic groups), were really the only Iranian peoples who moved NORTH of the Arab countries, and were VERY different from Persians because they were (1) NOT insular (very tribal and "backwards" according to some :) ) and (2) mated with SOME Semetic peoples. If you take an Iranian (Iranic peoples) and an Arab (Semetic), they are actually surprisingly VERY different GENETICALLY. This suggests not only the barriers that limited genetic flow (like mountains and hard terrain), but that fact that Persians did not WANT to mate with Westerners. Iran, for that one reason, cannot be considered Middle Eastern or Western ASian society. Even geographically, Iran is, most likely, South-Central Asian, a tiny bit West Asian (considering the number of Iraqis who migrated into Iran) and South Asian by way of provinces. Also, what you say about Iran's population WEST of the two deserts (Kavir and Lut) being less close to Central Asia is untrue. Remember, the Turks (part of the Turkic peoples) were actually ASIAN Asian! They had the epicanthal fold and the classic Asian features their Mongol counterparts had. But, for migratory purposes, these war-like peoples moves south-westwards, and mated with MANY (and I am mean MANY) Iranian people in Iran. This is why almost 1/3 of Iran is related to the Turks, and the reason why the Hazara's are not the ONLY people living in Iran with "small eyes." The Iranians are, yes, related very much so with the Caucasian peoples. But NOT very much so with Semetic (Arab, etc) people; only a little after Iranian women were raped and cities were plundered after the Islamic conquests of the East. Understand that the word "Caucasian" is EXTREMELY misused and has nOTHING to do with being White. Iranians are NOT White. Persians, and Iranic peoples, are NOT WHITE. Although ignorant Iranian people use the word "Aryan" to describe their "European relations," they are only saying this out of stupidity. In fact, genetically, Arabs are closer to European peoples than Persians! Here is why, for dumb reasons, NW Iran (Caucusus) is attached to the stigma of being white. Beautiful circassian women, from this area, who are totally Asian (who had absolutely no genetic affinity with the West) were renowned for their beauty. When Western countries came into Iran during the Qajar period, European (whites) brought these women (who had jet black hair, but pale white skin after living in the cold mountains) and used racist remarks to define them as THE ideal version of being WHITE. Eventually, this would lead to scientific racism and the idea of a "better" white race. What is funny is that these women were FULLY ASIAN (related to Turks in fact), and were NOT white, only called so. So yes, I agree Iranians is very much so related to the Caucasus and especially Turkey, but understand these peoples are Central Asians and WERE NOT Western Asian. As I have repeatedly said, the only affiliation Iran has with West Asia (Semetic people) is political. The Iranian peoples called the KURDS are the only Iranians living west, and they moved there themselves. Iranians are not Mesopotamian or Iraqi or Arab. Also, JUST BECAUSE MOST OF IRAN LIVES IN THE WEST DOES NOT MEAN THAT IRAN IS WESTERN!!! That just means there is better land there, as there had been for ages. In fact, there is a transition going on that is hoping to populate Iran's east. Iranians, by that regard, are insular and sedentary (lazy :) ). They just SIT there. That's the (funny) reason) why they are in NW. Indo-Iranian languages are distinct from Semitic languages. Very. Now, Iran is MANILY Central Asian. You are right that it (only 2-8% of population) has S Asian, mainly in Baloch lands. The Pashtuns have a very small genetic affinity with Iranians (varies from 3-9 percent), but are still and Iranian people. So YES, ALL of Afghanistan is an Iranian people. But YES, not the greatest genetic affinity. Also, I come from Mazandaran, and our family has more genetic affinity with Turks and my parents speak Azeri! Although the Turkic languages of the East are a LITTLE different from that of the West (Turkey), this proves that there are CONSIDERABLE Central Asian ties throughout ALL Iran, because moving through the deserts you mentioned (Lut, Kavir) were not the oNLY ways of promoting Eastern Asian gene flows into Iran. See http://www.iranian.com/main/blog/jahanshah-javid/genetics-iranians-least-similar-europeans-or-other-near-easterners ("Iranians least similar to Europeans or other Near-Easterners"). Iranians in Iran are a little diffenent than other IRANIC peoples in that they form a tighter genetic cluster than any other Asian group. Not really because of geographic barriers, but because of choice. Still, MANY almost voluntarily mated with the MANY Turkic peoples who moved through Iran to get into Turkey. This is why we even have the slightest bit of relation in W Asia in that regard.
Iran not REALLY Mesopot.[edit]
Mesopotamia (from the Ancient Greek: Μεσοποταμία: "[land] between rivers"; Arabic: بلاد الرافدين (bilād al-rāfidayn); Syriac: ܒܝܬ ܢܗܪܝܢ (beth nahrain): "land of rivers") is a toponym for the area of the Tigris–Euphrates river system, corresponding to modern-day Iraq and to a lesser extent northeastern Syria, southeastern Turkey and smaller parts of southwestern Iran. Thought you'd like to know, not really so much Iran-Iraq.
Mtheory1 (talk) 04:26, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Newest Post-Conversations on Iran[edit]
South Asia?[edit]
There is a member here named Mtheory1 who keeps on editing pages related to Iran and adding numerous mentions of Iran being South Asian. His only source of reference is the UN, which is the only group to ever consider Iran to be South Asian. Everyone else considers Iran to be Middle Eastern/Western Asian. He uses such reasons as Iranians "don't eat rock hard pita bread" to show that Iran is not Middle Eastern. He also says because Iranians eat Lavash (itself a caucasus, Turkish and Iranian food) and roti (its Indian and not Iranian), that proves that Iran is South Asian. He has also shown a hatred for Arabs many times, and I believe this is the fundamental reason why he wants to disassociate Iran from the Middle East.
I honestly view his numerous edits as vandalism, and want to try and find a resolution to this dispute here. ResurrectionOfABeast (talk) 14:53, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
I hear ya ResurrectionOfABeast, let's try and find an agreement. I care great deal about Iran and its VASTNESS, and this is why I am not trying to DELETE W Asia, just add S Asia (has nothing to do with techtonic plates; Balochistan-S Asian, is in Iran as well and 10% of pop.) and C Asia. I want to find compromise. And I never said I hate Arabs, we have religion similarities! But, like I said many times and you guys don't listen, we are NOT Semetic or Middle Eastern. The only Iranians ANYWHERE West of Iran are in Turkey, Azerbaijain, and NORTH Arabia (Syria and Iraq, and not Semetic, only KURDS!). We have same religion, but very very different culture. Shouldn't we be proud? Shouldn't YOU be proud (if you really are an Iranian)?! Mtheory1 (talk) 05:41, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
It has nothing to do with culture. The United Kingdom and United States share a great deal of cultural similarities. However they do not encompass the same region. Also I don't believe our cultural similarities with Indians are as great as you believe. Sure we came from the same Proto-Indo-Iranian group 5000 years ago or whenever. But since then we have changed greatly. Indians have integrated vastly with the local Dravidian culture, whilst Iranians didn't integrate with Elamites to nowhere near an extent. Also while culture is a subjective topic, I don't see many similarities with Indian food (apart from rice). We don't eat spicy food for example. We also don't wear the same clothes, speak similar languages or listen to similar music. The only things we do share with the Indian subcontinent is what they took from Persian culture from their rule by Persianized Mongols. So in this subjective term, I believe that we share more with our other West Asian nations then we do with South Asia.
Beyond the cultural talk, the only important issue is that of location. According to almost everybody apart from the UN, Iran is a member of the Middle East/Western Asia. By taking this overwhelming majority into account we can look at the UN ruling as an anomaly, and one that doesn't warrant inclusion in an article about Iran. Also it is claimed by many sources that Pakistan is a country straddling the Middle East and South Asia, because the Punjab and Sindh regions are South Asian, whilst the Baloch and Pashto parts are not. Therefore even Baloch area of Iran can not be considered South Asian, (BTW they are not 10% of Iran's population, they are much less at only 1.5 million).
I don't mind mentions of Iranian similarities with South Asia (within reason) be used in the Iran article. As I wouldn't mind the same similarities with Central Asia being used. I done a quick check and found that there are already 12 mentions of India in the Iran article, which I believe to already be overkill. But to state that Iran is South Asian is not true at all. Not in a geographical sense, and also not culturally (which doesn't even matter as I pointed out in the US/UK example). ResurrectionOfABeast (talk) 15:30, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
- The UN has not 'ruled' that Iran is a part of South Asia. Only one UN scheme, the 'United Nations geoscheme' has included Iran in South Asia only for 'statistical purposes' and no other reason. See United Nations geoscheme where it clearly states that: "According to the United Nations, the assignment of countries or areas to specific groupings is for statistical convenience and does not imply any assumption regarding political or other affiliation of countries or territories." - Iran is NOT a part of South Asia under any category (geography, history, culture, race, political affiliation). اردیبهشت (talk) 23:45, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
- Ridiculous. Do you know HOW MANY YEARS of history we have w/ S Asia? W Asian neighbors have mainly ATTACKED Iran, and Turkey (which Iran is greatly aligned with in many ways) is primarily Central Asian. NORTHERN ARABIA, is the only place Iranian peoples located in W Asia, and they are the Kurds, who were a migratory (and are) people. I am again NOT DELETING W ASIA, just supplanting more information to Iran to demonstrate its vastness. Hello, what about the Mughal empire?! And other empires before that were INFUSED with Persian genes and culture for YEARS. Read the wikipedia article and the sources from Cavalli (geneticist): we share better genetic affinity with our central asian neighbors and even S Asian neighbors (except only Kurds) than W Asians (mainly a Semetic peoples). Therefore, to reinforce the differentiation that MUST be made between Iran and Semetic nations (that Iran is NOT PART OF, genetically, culturally, many ways, we must at least INCLUDE Central and Southern Asia in these articles. This is why I am compromising! Is not this fair enough? To let all of these places be included? I am an Iranian (Mazandarani), and from a heavy Turkish family. I want to include our Central Asian influences!! My father is Balochi; which IS HEAVILY genetically South Asian, and homogenous with genes thereto with South Asia. They deserve to be included too! Why are we arguing about this! WHy? -Mtheory1 (talk) 02:22, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
TRUE IRANIAN CUISINE[edit]
According to اردیبهشت's sources:[edit]
The methods of preparing milk products stem, in the main, from the traditions of pastoral and nomadic groups living both on the Iranian plateau and in Central Asia. These products, together with cereals, formed the staple food of the nomadic tribes, being much more important than meat in their diet. The making of yogurt (Persian māst, standard Turkish yoğurt, Azeri qāteq), dried yogurt (Persian kašk, Turkish qurut), and white cheese (Persian panīr, similar to the Greek feta) probably originated from Central Asia but spread in ancient times to the Iranian plateau. The raw material for these products used by Central Asian tribes has always been ewe’s milk. In Iran likewise, popular taste preferred ewe’s milk to cow’s milk and still does today. The Central Asian beverage koumiss only came into use in Iran during the Mongol and Timurid periods and thereafter went out of vogue (Doerfer, Türkische und mongolische Elemente, nos. 481, 1472, 1866).
The above source is copied and pasted from http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/spazi-cookery, the same source User talk:اردیبهشت uses, among others, to try and make Iran's culinary practices, which are almost RADICALLY DIFFERENT from other "near eastern" countries' culinary practices, close to the near east. Persian cookery is very different from that in the mid east, simply because of years of barriers that prevented much sharing with anywhere west of Iran, and even geographical barriers. Iran is, primarily, a central and south asian nation, and this user is CONSTRANTLY trying to prove his/her point by making major, vandalising changes to other articles. Here is another post from that same website, which is an accepted Iranian encyclopedia:
“Iranian cookery.” The scanty direct and indirect information on eating habits in the pre-Islamic and early Islamic periods suggests that very refined culinary traditions were maintained at royal courts and in wealty households. The ampler information on the haute cuisine of the ʿAbbasid period leaves no doubt that many practices of Sasanian royal and aristocratic cookery were taken over more or less directly. On the other hand there is little evidence of any continuous threads of development linking the elite cookery of pre-Islamic and early Islamic Iran to the ordinary cookery current in Iran today. In all probability modern Iranian cookery belongs to a line of tradition traceable to the period between the 8th/14th and 10th/16th centuries. As a result of the vast conquests of the Mongols and Tīmūr, Central Asian and Far Eastern culinary practices penetrated to the Iranian plateau and merged with regional traditions of everyday cookery rather than with pre-Mongol aristocratic forms of fine cookery.
Both are evidently techniques of Central Asian origin elaborated and diversified in Iran during the first century of Safavid rule.
"These vegetables [aforementioned] figure in Iranian dishes far less than is the case of Mediterranean cookery." European (mainly French) and American culinary styles have hardly at all supplanted the traditional Iranian style in domestic cookery, though they have made their mark in another sector, restaurant cuisine. The more and more I read this article, the more I see how Iran is so closely aligned with Central Asia and is quite different from the so-called mid east. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtheory1 (talk • contribs) 02:17, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)