Talk:Azerbaijan People's Government

The name
The name is certainly incorrect. None of them had called their short-lived government Democratic Republic of South Azerbaijan. Where did you find this term? Bidabadi 20:58, 15 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes you are right. In theirofficial documents they called their government, Azerbaijan People's Government.


 * Now! and whoever was calling it, and it remained in the history,

Persianization
Quote: ''The steps that the Teheran regime took in the 1930s with the aim of Persianization of the Azeris and other minorities appeared to take a leaf from the writings of the reformist-minded intellectuals in the previous decade. In the quest of imposing national homogeneity on the country where half of the population consisted of ethnic minorities, the Pahlavi regime issued in quick succession bans on the use of Azeri on the premises of schools, in theatrical performances, religious ceremonies, and, finally, in the publication of books. Azeri was reduced to the status of a language that only could be spoken and hardly ever written. As the Persianization campaign gained momentum, it drew inspiration from the revivalist spirit of Zoroastrian national glories. There followed even more invasive official practices, such as changing Turkic-sounding geographic names and interference with giving children names other than Persian ones''.

''Tadeusz Swietochowski, Russia and Azerbaijan: A Borderland in Transition. ISBN 0231070683, page 122''

Grandmaster 04:53, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Azerbaijani leterary language was completely banned by the Shah. Check the above source: Azeri was reduced to the status of a language that only could be spoken and hardly ever written. Grandmaster 06:14, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * That doesn't mean the literary language was completely banned, you're interpreting the source in an WP:OR fashion. Trust me on this, there was no official ban on all literary work. Writing in Persian was encouraged at the expense of Azerbaijani, but there was no official ban on Azerbaijani, there are many Azerbaijani poems from that period, there were local papers with a page or two in Azerbaijani at that time. --Mardavich 06:57, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * If the books and other publications were banned, and the language could only be spoken on the streets, it was banned in a literary form. How could literary language develop, if it was not allowed to publish anything in it? Grandmaster 07:19, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Publication of books that were written entirely in Azerbaijani was banned under Reza Shah for a period of time, but literary work in Azerbaijani was not banned altogether. --Mardavich 07:26, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * One could create a literary work, but could not publish it. It was a ban, wasn't it? If you were unable to publish your work, who could read it? Grandmaster 07:33, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually Behzadi's Azerbaijani dictionary and Shahryar's Heydar Baba were both published. --alidoostzadeh 07:33, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Was it before or after 1945? Grandmaster 07:35, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Shahryar's poems, some of which were in Azeri, were regularly published in 1930's. --Mardavich 07:40, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Any quotes from reliable sourses to support that claim? As far as I know, Shahriyar's poems in Azeri were published later, after the World War II. Grandmaster 07:43, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Another quote:

If Pishevari's movement capitalized on Azerbaijani resentments that had accumulated during the years of Reza Shah's attempts at Persianization, Teheran's reactions to efforts at upgrading the status of the Azeri language could only inflame these feelings.

I added that line to the article. Grandmaster 07:42, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Reza Shah's own wife had poetry in Turkish as she was an Azerbaijani. --alidoostzadeh 07:57, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * That’s interesting, because the shah was known for referring to Azerbaijanis as “donkeys”. That actually shows that he was a very chauvinist person despite his relation to Azeris and his Persianization campaign was not a coincidence. Grandmaster 09:59, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * The source is not reliable. The actual use of donkeys goes at least back to the Qajar era and it is usually in Tehran (the capital) where there is a joke about each minority.  Esfahanis are considered greedy.  Qazvinis are considered homosexuals.  Rashti's aldulterous.  Mashhadi's as thiefs.  So this is kind of like popular culture pretty much like the Irish are considered drunks and Poles considered dumb in popular american joke culture. There is a joke about every group who has migrated to the capital.  Indeed the same jokes are made about Kurds by Azerbaijanis in Urumiyeh and I am sure there are ethnic jokes about some groups being this or that in the republic of Azerbaijan.  It is pretty much like the Laz in Turkey who are joked about.  Although I do not agree with such a popular culture, but it is centered around the capital which sees itself as better than other cities and it is not even remotely related to Rezashah whose mothers background is actually from the Caucus.  --alidoostzadeh 10:18, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I read that in many Azeri sources, including Chehragani. I know what you are talking about, there are similar jokes in Azerbaijan about people from various regions, but the sources connect that statement personally to shah. I’m not going to include any such claims into the article, I just think that the fact demonstrates the attitude of Pahlavi regime towards Azerbaijani people. Grandmaster 10:25, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Well it is not fact to begin with because the term Donkey Turk like Homosexual Qazvini" and Mashhadi Thief".. goes back to at least the Qajar era when Tehran became capital. Besides Rezashah who was actually half Azerbaijani and his wife was Azerbaijani, Mohammad Reza Shah was 3/4 Azerbaijani and his wife Farah was an Azerbaijani.  Also most of the people that called for the Persianization of the language of Azerbaijan were Azerbaijanis even if they were opposed in other ideas(Kasravi and Khiyabani who were opposed but both were for spread of Persian at the cost of Turkish) or Taqi Arani who died opposing Rezashah yet was for removing of Turkish.  So this sort of mentality was a reaction to the claims of young Turks and other groups for the secession of Iranian Azerbaijan..  Azerbaijanis are heavily represented in the clergy, economy of Iran and are part of the creme of the crop of Iranian society.  Tehran is the biggest Azerbaijani city in the world as well as the biggest Persian one.  Unfortunately the government of the republic of Azerbaijan likes to paint a distorted view but this only hurts the republic of Azerbaijan in creating distrust and naturally other countries of the region will take advantage to further their interest.  I hope both governments realize that a policy of non-interference is to their best interest.  --alidoostzadeh 10:34, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * A Rightist Azerbaijani republic newspaper did a recent interview with Farrah Pahlavi (herself an Azerbaijani). . --alidoostzadeh 10:37, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * That’s an interesting interview. Still it’s hard to understand why ¾ Azerbaijani shah was trying to ban Azerbaijani language. I think the government of Azerbaijan tries to do its best to avoid any confrontation with Iran, while some nationalistic oppositional groups do otherwise. I think many people in Azerbaijan are suspicious that Iran is trying to spread radical Islam to our country. But that’s an unrelated to the article issue. Grandmaster 10:53, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I do not think Iran is trying to spread radical Islam.. But there are Saudi Wahabites and also Turkish government who are trying to Sunnify Azerbaijan. As per the Shah, his current son Reza Pahlavi is at least more than 80% Azerbaijani and his wife is from Zanjan and so their Kids are pretty much Azerbaijani.  Either way going back to the article, the statement attributed to Reza Shah is false.  Atually Reza Shah knew Azeri-Turkish well.  --alidoostzadeh 11:23, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I think what GM needs to understand is that the majority of the people in Iran's history who were against the Turkic langauge spoken by the Azari, and preached going back to the pre Turkification language of the Azari's, were Azari's themselves, a fact left out when politicians and "academics" from the R. of Azerbaijan always fail to mention to their own people. GM himself calls Kasravi a "Persian chauvanist". When did Kasravi become Persian GM?Khosrow II 20:25, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

New references
Added some factual references, these should not cause disputes as they're mostly references to events and dates. Thanks. Atabek 16:24, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Why are you trying to use outdated sources? One of them is from 1947...Azerbaijani 17:59, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Bringing personal views from a book, such as calling Pishevari an "enlightened and respectable leader" can't be called "adding facts" ! and that's against the NPOV.If we are going to quote from the books, then the similar opposite views can be quoted here .--Alborz Fallah 11:23, 19 May 2007 (UTC)



Requested move

 * 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. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: no consensus. The dialogue here was entirely between two editors who were unable to agree on which title was more commonly used in reliable sources. It is possible to create National Government of Azerbaijan as a redirect to the current article, but there needs to be consensus to rename the article. Aervanath (talk) 23:12, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Azerbaijan People& → National Government of Azerbaijan – The official name of this government in English is National Government of Azerbaijan which is also its commonest name in google books with 141 hits (the current name has 70 hits most of which are from EN WP). sicaspi (talk) 16:58, 11 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose : There is an overlap between Azerbaijan Democratic Republic ( of Az.Republic ) and the separatist movement of Iranian Azerbaijan in Google searching. Not only the term "Azerbaijan People's Government" is superior in regular search exam (44,600 results) versus "National Government of Azerbaijan " (24,800 hits) but also in Russian Wikipedia it is : Азербайджанское народное правительство (Azerbaijan People's Government), in French Gouvernement populaire d'Azerbaïdjan and in German "Aserbaidschanische Volksregierung Aserbaidschanisch" . Over all , the communist governments built in Soviet era tend to use the generic name of "People's government " versus opposing nationalistic governments ( like People's Republic of China , versus [National] Republic of China or People's Republic of Poland against Republic of Poland and etc)  --Alborz Fallah (talk) 18:25, 11 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Your thesis needs sources as this government although backed by USSR was not limited to communists and people with different opinions were involved in it. This government's name did not include "People" (i.e. Xalq in Azerbaijani) but included "National" (i.e. Milli in Azerbaijani)sicaspi (talk) 19:47, 11 July 2012 (UTC)


 * That government is a known creation of Soviet hegemony : that is not my thesis . About translation, I can explain that in Azeri , both words of Xalq ( Khalgh ) and Milli , points to the word people. In modern Persian language , the words nation ( Mellat ) and Folk (Khalgh) have different sociopolitical meanings , but in Azeri (at least at that time of half a century ago ) , there was not a clear differentiation between two words .--Alborz Fallah (talk) 16:52, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I meant your thesis regarding translation of "Milli" and People and your last sentence. whatever we say here, the mainstream academic trend is for using the name "National" as part of its name as pointed to bellow.  sicaspi (talk) 19:12, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * If it was a known fact that the mainstream academic trend  is Azerbaijan National Government, then we would not talk here ! As I mentioned before , the Google test results are showing the overlap between the government of Baku in 1918 and the Iranian Azerbaijan of 1946 . As an alternative , try this one : "Azerbaijan National Government" + Tabriz (13 results) , that shows that naming is not prevalent at all : I'm adding the word Tabriz to the search because that city was the capital of the target state , and can role out the unwanted overlap results of the Baku government of 1918 .--Alborz Fallah (talk) 21:31, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The mainstream academic trend is shown bellow in the reliable sources. The Google test was only referred to help us, but my argument is based on what such big professors and scholarships use in their works. I don't know what test you're speaking about since "Azerbaijan National Government" + "tabriz" has 34000 hits in regular and 95 hits in google books.sicaspi (talk) 01:51, 13 July 2012 (UTC)


 * That's a technical bias, in your search of regular (not Google books ) search of "Azerbaijan National Government" + "tabriz" , if you go to last page of the search , you will find out the real search has only 109 results at the best ( by including all of the omitted results ) , And in Google books the real result ( known by going to the last page of the search ) is only 13 .--Alborz Fallah (talk) 13:01, 13 July 2012 (UTC)


 * That's why I think this type of " " +" " googling does not prove anything and should be avoided.--sicaspi (talk) 18:15, 13 July 2012 (UTC)


 * But still the question of overlap remains unanswered .--Alborz Fallah (talk) 06:36, 14 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't see overlap, as it can be seen in the Google Books search that this name is pointing to the Iranian one. --sicaspi (talk) 18:35, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * How can't you see the enormous overlap ?! We do need good faith in editing Wikipedia ...

That shows not only the National Government of Azerbaijan is a very rare word in use, but also it is used in other meanings as well ( 19 out of 39 ). --Alborz Fallah (talk) 05:03, 15 July 2012 (UTC)


 * There is no "enormous" overlap. This name is dominantly used to refer to this government by mainstream sources. May you please explain your argument, the subtractions and this table? It is so vague. --sicaspi (talk) 06:15, 15 July 2012 (UTC)


 * If you really care about wiki mirrors you'd better look at search for "Azerbaijan People's Government". It seems that this name has been used mostly only in wikipedia.--sicaspi (talk) 06:20, 15 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Isn't it ( overlap ) enormous ?! Please look again (Pie chart):

--Alborz Fallah (talk) 11:41, 15 July 2012 (UTC)


 * You have presented some numbers and when I ask how you found them, you change the plot! I mean how have you drawn such a conclusion.sicaspi (talk) 16:24, 15 July 2012 (UTC)


 * How did I find them ? Count them one by one in the search result ! --Alborz Fallah (talk) 04:41, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Such a search claiming finding overlap is baseless.--sicaspi (talk) 03:55, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

The other common name is Azerbaijan National Government with 172 hits in google books and more than 68,300 hits in regular search. Based on the Google books search either Azerbaijan National Government of National government of Azerbaijan are by far more widely used than the current name in the current scholarship. the proposed name is also what this government was called by itself. We do not care about other wikis since we are now in EN wiki. If we want to care about other languages we should look at the Azerbaijani language where this government is called "آذربایجان میللی حکومتی" or National Government of Azerbaijan. Major scholars of history call this government National Government of Azerbaijan and it is commonest in academic literature. Some examples from mainstream sources:


 * Touraj Atabaki in Azerbaijan: Ethnicity and the Struggle for Power in Iran
 * Abbas Milani in The Shah
 * Jamil Hasanli in At the dawn of the Cold War: the Soviet-American crisis over Iranian Azerbaijan, 1941-1946
 * In British documents on foreign affairs it is called as Azerbaijan National Government.

--sicaspi (talk) 19:39, 11 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Can you rewrite the page that Abbas Milani uses the term ? I can not find it . And about Jamil Hasanli, he is not neither a neuter source (since he is a pro-pishevari editor) nor a speaker of English language himself : all of his books are translated by others , representing his POVs.--Alborz Fallah (talk) 11:22, 15 July 2012 (UTC)


 * This is the link for Milani's The Shah (Page 124). If you have any questions how to translate the Azeri word milli, Milani answers you. I am talking to you academically. Prof. Hasanli is a leading researcher in this field. His research has made new insights into this government and that period of time during his fellowship at Wilson center. Using new archives he "brings to light a lot of new information" (Journal of Cold War Studies review).--sicaspi (talk) 16:36, 15 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Still the web address is not clear : the link that you present, only points to the book itself , and does not show the text , I think it is not reliable because you searched for the word Hasanli in the book and you may have find the Bibliography section of the book : not the book itself : your citation is not standard wiki citation . --Alborz Fallah (talk) 05:57, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * So what? It's a positive peer review of the book in an academic journal. What are you talking about? (you may find it here as well)--sicaspi (talk) 03:51, 17 July 2012 (UTC)


 * About the reliability of Jamil Hasanli, as I said before , he is a nationalist member of National Assembly of Azerbaijan. Rep , and his points of view are pro-DPA : Osamu Miyata , Faculty of International Relations, University of Shizuoka, Japan ; writes in Cambridge International Journal of Middle East Studies :"...it nevertheless places too much emphasis on the role of the DPA without closely examining the cause of it's failure. The book fails to address, for example , the claims by some scholars that the DPA's radical land reform and language education were not supported by large segments of Iranian Azeris. In addition , there were differences between the way Iranian Azerbaijanis and Soviet Azerbaijanis viewed historical developments , which engendered different emphases in the national feelings held by each side . Hasanli's work fails to adequately explore the variegated range of feelings held by Iranian Azerbaijanis , nor does it help us understand how much the DPA's ideology was supported or understood by the Iranian Azerbaijanis or how far they supported the Soviet presence. Iranian Azerbaijanis in general were not as impassioned about nationalist or separatist goals as were Pishevari and the DPA...." --Alborz Fallah (talk) 06:26, 16 July 2012 (UTC)


 * We so not judge people based on racial or political factors. He's a scholar and it is what matters.


 * Please read it completely, the review begins by saying This is a well-researched book, Through this discerning and informed use of ... archives ... Hasanli sheds light on less well-understood areas of that period...
 * Each work has many good features and shortcomings are inevitable. It is indeed an important historical scholarship in this field. It is published in Cold War Studies at Harvard University' series whose reliability is clear. Please be fair towards what you read. sicaspi (talk) 03:40, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * 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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Azerbaijan People's Government. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091016033236/http://history.sandiego.edu/gen/ww2Timeline/iran.html to http://history.sandiego.edu/gen/ww2Timeline/iran.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:59, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Map and Flags
1.Azerbaijan People's Government Used Persian and Soviet Union flags 2.No one could clearly drawing any Border between Pishewari and GhaziMohammad domination.Real Ruler was Stalin so any Map is Joke.Gholaghabijan (talk) 09:37, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Bijan

NPOV
"while the Russian Army had been on its best behavior when stationed in Azerbaijan, the Iranian Army behaved as an occupying force and brutalized the local inhabitants. The beards of peasants were burned, their wives and daughters raped. Houses were plundered and livestock were stolen. The Army left a trail of death and destruction behind it" this has been rejected by many sources, Azerbaijan: Ethnicity and the Struggle for Power in Iran by Touraj Atabaki page 226, Russia and Azerbaijan: A Borderland in Transition by Tadeusz Swietochowski page 154, even according to Richard Cottam in his book Nationalism in Iran pages 124-128, people were Supporting the Shah's forces. Amir Ghandi (talk) 09:47, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

the map
The map used in this page is historically wrong.please change the map to correct form by using this page on persian wikipedia.thanks Aryann2656Doc (talk) 11:18, 20 May 2022 (UTC)