Talk:Ferdowsi/Archive 1

Intro
The article seems to be gushing with unsourced praise, and can't really be said to be written in an objective tone. As I don't know much about the subject, it'd probably be best if someone who does would perform a rewrite. --Impaciente 01:14, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Note that this is a duplicate article. There is another version up at Ferdosi. DanKeshet Plus plenty of redirects to Firdausi. Wikipedia should not kow-tow to third-world adolescents who insist of the most preposterous transliterations conceivable of names of natives.


 * In order to distinguish yourself from "third-world adolescents" you don't need to make a first-rate bigoted ass of yourself in a collaborative project like Wikipedia. Try to behave like a civilized person if you can.  As for your outrage and emotional sensitivity to orthography, all I can say is you show me a standard that I can use, and I will be happy to take that into consideration in the future.  In the absence of any such standard, should we lowly third-worlders first seek the approval of Your First-World Eminence prior to contributing to Wikipedia?     --K1 22:02, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)


 * I redirected Firdausi; something that you could have done instead of the much longer and useless line that you had put in there. Why do you think the REDIRECT feature exists in Wikipedia?  Anyhow, if this is really causing you to lose sleep at night, feel free to make "Firdausi" the title and redirect "Ferdowsi" to it.     --K1 16:44, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)

In order to avoid transliteration controversies like these in the future, despite all of the renderings in question (Firdausi, Ferdosi, Ferdawsi, etcetera) being based on accepted transcription orthographies, I would like to suggest that in future we limit entries such as these to being titled in their original alphabets. Sure, it will make the Wikipedia impossible to use for anyone not already intimately familiar with what they are looking up, but it will make people happy.--KASchmidt 03:56, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I just noticed something: 935-1020? He died at age 85 in the eleventh century? What was he eating, and can I have some? Is this accurate? I have him being born in 941 in a book from 1905 (The Shahnama of Firdausi, part of Truebner's Oriental Series, "introduction by Edmond Warner"); this seems like a more reasonable lifespan, but not by much.--KASchmidt 08:04, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Name Change proposal: "Ferdawsi" or "Firdawsi"?
The title of the article should change to "Ferdawsi", since it was the master's real and correct name. In all Persian texts and manuscripts including Shahnameh his name is written "فردوسی" (transliteration: ferdosi) and not "فیردوسی" (firdawsi). However, lingisticly has been observed that the New Persian has lost the "aw" sound, which is now replaced with soft "o". Therefore writing “Ferdowsi” is also incorrect (“aw” sound still exists in number of Iranian languages such as Kurdish and Dari). ← ← Parthian Shot (Talk)  13:49, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


 * The title of the article should stay exactly how it is because it is correct. According to US Library of Congress, the correct transliteration of the "eh" sound in "فردوسی" transliterates to "i," hence "Firdawsi." "Firdawsi" is how the majority of academia spells it and how Persian books in Iran translate his name.


 * Library of Congress Persian transliteration tables, which use Firdawsi as an example under Vav section

http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/romanization/persian.pdf


 * Library of Congress article on Persian literature using Firdawsi

http://www.loc.gov/rr/amed/guide/nes-iranianworld.html


 * Academia article using Firdawsi

http://www.jstor.org/view/13561898/ap020018/02a00210/0


 * Artin e Bozorg 10:06, 10 February 2007 (UTC)


 * There are hundreds of examples where "Ferdowsi" is used in academic journals. Examples:, , Sangak 17:56, 10 February 2007 (UTC)


 * They are using it incorrectly, the official US LOC transliteration is Firdawsi. Further, most major encyclopedias use Firdawsi. Encarta, Columbia , Britannica


 * They are using it Incorrectly, since the official US LOC transliteration is Firdawsi?! Who cares what the US official LOC says. The correction of term should be consulted by academic and scholarly references, and not a governmental organisation. However, the point of reference should be “Encyclopaedia Iranica”, as the main and most correct and accurate source of information about Iranian civilisation and culture. ← ← Parthian Shot  (Talk)  04:28, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I support the move to the correct spelling (Ferdowsi) --Rayis 00:50, 2 March 2007 (UTC)


 * The standard transliteration of his name is related to Manual of Style (Persian) (which is still debated). I think Firdawsi is more consistent with the academic transliteration schemes which are used for Classic Persian. However, when another spelling is much more widely used (for example Ferdowsi,Sarbedaran, compared to Firdawsi,Sarbadaran), the most common spelling takes precedence over the standard transliteration. Jahangard 22:48, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Born 935 or 940?
In many websites i see that Ferdowsi was born in 940. such as here:. I just wanted to make sure. --Arad 22:30, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

The statue in Rome has the plinth inscribed FERDOVSI 935-1025 AD. Encyclopaedia Britannica also has 935, so I suspect some web pages have copied the wrong information. I will boldly correct the page! This is the image on the page and can be clearly read if expanded  Surrey John    (Talk) 15:04, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Name Change?
It's Pirdawsi, NOT Ferdowsi http://www.iranian.com/History/2007/April/Pirdawsi/index.html 24.200.254.13 18:21, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Describing Ferdowsi
I am sorry, but who ever wrote this description needs to understand a few fundimentals about Persian poets. Ferdowsi purposly tried to write the Shahnameh in pure Persian (Parsi/Farsi) He only included some 500 arabic words in the entire work. Therefore describing him as 'a pious muslim' is very misleading. Please do not make religious references when describing Persian poets. If you want to be accurate refrain from this language. Afterall one does not describe Beethoven or Mozart or Verdi as good christians. Their religion has nothing to do with their artistic ability, and they themselves have never made any references to that fact. Espacially Ferdowsi. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Behzadbayati (talk • contribs) 14:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC).

Conflicting legends
There are two legends in the article, with differences of detail (money/dystich, camelloads of silver). That's the way legends go, but they should be merged or at least put together.

Muslim or Zoroastrian? Make up your minds!
So, is he a Zoroastrian or a Shia Muslim? The article is nopt clear on this point. It seems more likely that he was a Zoroastrian or a member of another Persian faith rather than a Muslim. The Mummy (talk) 12:55, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Ferdowsi and Religion
You can find better sources than I have posted here, it was just for convenience sake, but I remember reading literary history of Persia by E Browne and Persian Anthology by S.H.Nasr which mentioned in the biography of Ferdowsi that he was Shia. This is worth a mention in his wiki article. The following is an excerpt from the sources posted below.

Ferdowsi was a Shia Muslim, which is apparent from the Shahnameh itself and confirmed by early accounts. On the one hand, he was lenient regarding religion. As Nöldeke remarks, Ferdowsi remembered the religion of his forbears with respect, and at the same time, nowhere did he show any signs of a deep Islamic faith. Indeed, to the contrary, here and there are moments in the Shahnameh which, even if they were present in his sources, should not strictly have been given currency by the pen of a committed Muslim (Nöldeke and Bogdanov, 1930, 38-39). On the other hand, however, he also showed a prejudice in favor of his own tradition (i.e. Shi'ism) and, as is apparent from the exordium to the Shahnameh, considered his own sect to be the only true Islamic one. The explanation for this contradiction lies in the fact that during the first centuries of Islam, in Persia, Shi'ism went hand in hand with the national struggle in Khorasan, or very nearly so, such that the caliphate in Baghdad and its political supporters in Persia never made any serious distinction between the "Majūs" (Zoroastrians), "Zandīq" (Manicheans), "Qarmatīs" (Ismaili Shi'ism), and "Rāfezīs" (Shias in general). http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Ferdowsi http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Ferdowsi Ferdowsi was a Shia Muslim, which is apparent from the Shahnameh itself and confirmed by early accounts. To some extent, this is easily apparent from his name. Ferdowsi's kunya, or patronymic nickname, Abu'l Qasim, meaning "father of Qasim" is a popular name among Shias, who regard it with the same honor as naming sons "Muhammad" as Abu'l Qasim was one of the Prophet Muhammad's nicknames, but its use is discouraged by Sunnis who base it on a hadith where the Prophet said this name was reserved for him alone: "Name [sons] by my name, but do not name [them] by my Kunya for I AM [ABU'L] QASIM" However, Shias do not consider this hadith authentic, and a multitude of important figures in Shia Islam have had the term "Abu'l Qasim" somewhere in their name, from Grand Ayatollah Khoei to the Imam Mahdi himself. http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=153364340359&topic=8541 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.80.113.143 (talk) 23:27, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Encyclopedia Iranica provides a detailed explanation of his religion. He was a Shia Muslim confirmed by his earlier accounts, however, in recent times, some have doubted his Shi'ism. - --Theotherguy1 (talk) 21:52, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Add picture(s)
Please add a picture of the manuscript of the Shahnama

http://www.payvand.com/news/10/mar/1001.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.80.113.143 (talk) 23:34, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Firdevsi
in Turkish Böri (talk) 09:51, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

?
Takabeg (talk) 23:20, 26 June 2011 (UTC) Takabeg (talk) 23:20, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Firdousi Persian -Llc 27,900
 * Firdausi Persian -Llc 22,300
 * Firdusi Persian -Llc 10,100
 * Ferdowsi Persian -Llc 8,790
 * The Encyclopaedia Iranica uses Ferdowsi. --Lysozym (talk) 00:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Massive un-encyclopedic changes
I would like to hear the reasoning for the massive un-encyclopedic changes done throughout this article by the anon IP. --Kansas Bear (talk) 04:50, 12 August 2011 (UTC)


 * To the "new" user:BEARskinner, I would still like to hear the reasoning for the massive changes done to this article. Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 06:51, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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. 

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:15, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Ferdowsi → Firdausi – per WP:COMMONNAME


 * Firdawsi, Firdousi are acceptable.

According to GoogleBooks Ngram Viewer comparison

1) Firdausi, 2) Ferdowsi, 3) Firdusi in 2008

According to google books:

I added keywords "Tus" and "poet", because Ferdowsi/Firdausi is very popular and we must rearch among more specific works (books, articles etc).

Ferdowsi/Ferdousi/Firdowsi
 * Ferdowsi Tus poet -Llc 120, we can find also Ferdousi and Firdowsi in this result
 * Ferdousi Tus poet -Llc 170, we can find also Ferdowsi in this result
 * Firdowsi Tus poet -Llc 150, we can find also Ferdowsi in this result

Firdausi/Firdousi/Firdawsi
 * Firdausi Tus poet -Llc 377, we can find also Firdousi and Firdawsi in this result
 * Firdousi Tus poet -Llc 372, we can find also Firdausi and Firdawsi in this result
 * Firdawsi Tus poet -Llc 394, we can find also Firdausi and Firdousi in this result

Firdusi
 * Firdusi Tus poet -Llc 215

Ferdusi
 * Ferdusi Tus poet -Llc 90

Ferdausi
 * Ferdausi Tus poet -Llc 10

-- Takabeg (talk) 01:10, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. Google is such an unreliable tool for this kind of thing, although the searches have been done with considerable care, because it substitutes one spelling for another, trying to guess what you want. Perhaps searching the BL for firdausi as author (9) and firdawsi as author (293), or browsing the LoC Author/creator list (Firdawsi 219, Firdausi no clear result), or searching WorldCat for ti:firdawsi (841) and ti:firdausi (727), may give clearer and more reliable results? All these, as well as the Google search by Takabeg, indicate but do not prove that 'firdawsi' is the commonest spelling. I suggest modifying the move request to reflect that. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:08, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Ngram avoids the substitution problem; that's being what it's for (it has other difficulties instead, like not been able to distinguish between different uses of the same word). In this case, it shows Firdausi, the systematic transliteration, as dominant in most of the twentieth century, and as having changed places with Ferdowsi four times in the last twenty years, with Firdawsi just behind. In such cases, where no one name is clearly most common, it makes sense to choose the leaders, all of which will be recognizable, on some other criterion. Perhaps, since there is no established form, it would be valuable to use Firdausi as a systematic, and therefore predictable, form. (There are of course several systems for Persian, as for Arabic; but Ferdowsi seems to me an intentional break with all the systems.) Septentrionalis PMAnderson 15:18, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
 * So which of the many systems of Persian transliteration is to be taken as "systematic, and therefore predictable"? I don't speak Farsi, but would expect any systematic transliteration of فردوسی to represent all the consonantal values regardless of the choices made for the vowel inflections, as 'firdawsi' and 'ferdowsi' do and 'firdausi' does not. So I guess I Oppose the move as proposed, while still favouring a move to 'Firdawsi'. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Is Firdawsi any of the systems involved? If not, why that form? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:41, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, should have been clearer: for this Qur'anic Arabic word, deriving from the singular of "Paradise", the appropriate system must be that of Arabic transliteration; or actually, transcription, as the vowel inflections should be shown, "frdwsi" being relatively unintelligible. In what system is "firdausi" systematic? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:17, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The letter "vāv" (و) represents both the consonant "v" and the vowel sound "ow" in Persian.--Folantin (talk) 10:36, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Strong oppose Using Google is a completely blunt instrument and I still don't entirely understand Takabeg's methodology, which has resulted in such ridiculous decisions as moving the page on Hafez to "Hafiz Shirazi", which is definitely not the way the poet is best known in English (it's either "Hafez" or "Hafiz", with or without diacritics, but definitely no "surname"). "Ferdowsi" is the most common recent form of the name. It's the form used by the notable recent, almost complete translation of the Shahnameh by Dick Davis in Penguin Classics and it's also the form used by Encyclopaedia Iranica. It's also the form used in Michael Axworthy's Penguin history of Iran (published in the last few years). Encyclopaedia Britannica (the up-to-date one) also has "Ferdowsi". All this strongly suggests this is the form contemporary experts prefer and thus the version most likely to be encountered by the common reader. --Folantin (talk) 12:49, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
 * There is no point causing the immense amount of disruption the move would entail when the current version is in line with Britannica, Encyclopaedia Iranica (the most authoritative reference work on Iranian matters) and the most noteworthy translation of the work into English by Dick Davis, Professor of Persian at Ohio State University. --Folantin (talk) 16:44, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Important addendum Google Books isn't even accurate. It lists the Dick Davis translation under "Firdawsi" whereas the book uses "Ferdowsi" throughout. Likewise, Google lists the earlier Penguin Classics version of "The Legend of Seyavash" as being by "Firdawsi" when you can clearly see that the cover has "Ferdowsi" . Google Books is simply not to be trusted to decide these matters. --Folantin (talk) 10:09, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, agree 100%, as already noted. Do the same considerations apply to the catalogues of the principal libraries of the English-speaking world? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:13, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * No idea. I'd just use common sense and say the most common English usage is the one the average reader is most likely to come across. "Ferdowsi" is used by the major modern translation of the work (the one anybody wanting to read Ferdowsi in English is going to buy), Encyclopaedia Britannica and Encyclopaedia Iranica, the most prestigious reference work on Iranian matters. Wikipedia should reflect this common contemporary usage. --Folantin (talk) 10:19, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Finally, it's worth mentioning that all the sources used in writing this article spell the name "Ferdowsi" (except Frye, published back in 1975, who has "Firdosi"). --Folantin (talk) 16:00, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.

Ferdawsi - Religion
It is mentionned in this article that Ferdawsi was a shia. I do not agree with this point of view. In Shahnameh Ferdawsi glorifies Omar ibn Al-Khattab and other campanions. A normal shia hates Omar Ibn Al-khattab. Ferdawsi says about Omar: عمر کرد اسلام را آشکار, بیاراست گیتی چو باغ بهار The translation is: Omar revealed Islam to the world, therefore he beautified the world like a garden of spring. Among shia scholars, Alama Tehrani in his book (نور ملکوت قران) criticizes and insults Ferdawsi because he is not acceptable for shias. Hope you will correct the mistake. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.154.54.107 (talk) 16:38, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

His name in Tajik Persian
Nobody says Persian and Tajiki are different languages. Tajiki is a dialect/variant of Persian, but it uses Cyrillic script. Tajiks are Persian too (a Persian sub-group). Ferdowsi influenced Tajik culture and he is a cultural icon in Tajikistan. I think his name in Tajik Persian is not a bad idea in this article, why? Because it gives info about his influence on Tajik culture, and maybe someone needs to search his name in Tajik alphabet. Zyma (talk) 03:24, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree. Since Persian - in the forms of Dari-Persian and Tajik - uses two writing systems, both scripts should be mentioned. --Lysozym (talk) 15:18, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

I think the other user gave good reason. tajikestan wasn't a country back then. It was all iranian. Also the Tajik language is a new language It did not exist then. Not to mention the text is in farsi. Why is there a need to discuss it at al? 68.193.18.112 (talk) 23:16, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

OK first of all before we engage in this discussion let me clarify one thing:

I consider you both to be my friends and my brothers and sisters. I will treat everybody with respect here and I have a feeling that everybody will treat me with respect as well. So with that being said here are the reasons why I believe the poet's name should be only in the Perso-arabic lettering and not Tajik lettering in the first sentence of this article:

1- Geopolitical Reasoning Ferdowsi was born at a time when the current nation of Tajikestan did not exist. Ferdowsi was born in Khorasan, in City of Tus the town which is currently in the nation of Iran. Culturally Ferdowsi would be a Persian or Iranian which at the time was only one cultural and national entity. The language at the time of Ferdowsi was Farsi/Parsi which is the same as the modern day Farsi spoken in Iran and since Dari and Farsi are essentially the same languages with different names only (thanks to the British influence perhaps historically) Ferdowsi's name would be فردوسی in his original language. Also all of the text in his shahnahem are in Farsi/Dari (Persoarabic Persian).

2- Common usage reason/ Common name use Wikipedia Encyclopedia recognizes common names as per usage by the Largest number of people. The Persian language is a pluri-national language spoken by some 110 million people mostly in Iran. Iran has the HIGHEST number of Persian speakers some 75+ million people and by the common ground usage these people know Ferdowsi with his Persian alphabet name and not his Tajik alphabet. For more info see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Article_titles

3- Tajik as a distinct alphabet or ethnic group The Tajik language was originally one and the same as the Persian language spoken today in Iran and western Afghanistan. During the Qajar dynasty of Iran, the incompetent Qajar kings lost most of the Iranian/Persian territories to the superpowers of the times which were the Russians and the English. Then Russian empire in an attempt to isolate the Tajiks and severe the cultural link to Iran to avoid any attempt for independence created the Tajik lettering which is essentially replacing Persian words with similar sounding Slavic or Russian lettering. For instance the English way of saying the word فردوسی would be Ferdowsi or Ferdosi or Firdosi, etc. So in a sense the Tajik language is the SAME as Persian but its alphabet has been replaced. Similar thing happened when Ottoman Turkish lots its persoarabic lettering due to Attaturk's involvement. So yes Tajik is a variant (dialectically) of Persian but it is essentially the same. Many tajiks actually understand and read Farsi and many (at least in my experience) prefer to use the Persian lettering not the Tajik lettering as that allows them more proxity to the Persian culture the centre of which is in Iran. Additionally by the time of Ferdowsi there was no distinct Tajik ethnic group as everybody was Iranian or Persian back then.

4- Misleading usage of the Tajik name as far as the message it gives the way it is used now

Using both the Persian and the Tajik variant of the name misleads the readers of the article. It implies that Ferdowis was from Tajikestan. Tajikestan as an independent nation is younger than me! It represent a very tiny portion of the large Persian linguistic and cultural reach but in all honesty it is at the periphery of what would be the Persian presence in the middleast.

5- Ferdowsi's own personal beliefs

Ferdowsi was a very unifying figure. If you know about his shahnameh and his poems he strive to create a pure and unique version of the Persian language at a time when the Arabic culture and language looked almost certain to engulf and destroy Persian. Ferdowsi had to literarly suffer for 30 years from one king's court to another to publish his book and as you well know how died before he could even get paid for his contribution. Ferdowsi's biggest concern was division and loss of unity in the alphabet and the central vocabulary of Persian. Imagine if he was to see today that his name in his beloved language is written using Slavic lettering! He would be flaberghasted! On that principle alone his own name from his time period which is also the common usage name today and the dominant literary form should be the one used.

Of course I can produce many many google books and sources to support all I said and I have a feeling I wont be asked to since you seem to know enough about this figure and Persian history.

I do however have a solution to:

Why not mention his name in the body of the article instead of in the lead? This way for any average Tajik reader they can see his name but at the same time his name would not be competing with Persian. I mean at the end of the day Persian is ALSO TAJIK! So why this dual alphabet focus is important beats me. I can incorporate his name in the article easily. Would that be something that you would be willing to agree with?

Thanks

Dr. Persi (talk) 00:34, 25 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I do not agree. The simple fact is that the Persian language uses two different alphabets: the Arabic alphabet in Iran and Afghanistan and the Russian alphabet in Tajikistan. And since both writing system are used for the SAME language (in fact, except for a very few lexical differences, the Tajik texts are practically a transliteration of the more common Arabic alphabet), I see no reason why the Tajik spelling should not be mentioned in the lead?! It's just the speeling in Tajik, nothing more.
 * The argument that "Tajikistan did not exist back then" is very weak, because Iran as a modern nation did nit exist either. Ferdowsi was born in Khorasan, and Khorasan at that time was part of the Samanid and (later) Ghaznawid kingdoms. Ferdowsi's mother-tongue was - most likely - the Khorasanian dialect which today survives in the Western dialects of Afghanistan (namely Herat), a dialect that nowadays is considered part of "Dari" and spoken by "Tajiks". Besides that, every article about pre-Islamic Persians also contains the modern Arabic spelling of the name (for example Cyrus the Great), although neither the Arabic alphabet nor its Persian variant existed back then. Should we also remove the modern Persian spelling from those articles because it "did not exist back then"??!
 * As for the name "Tajik": until the 1910s, "Tajik" was also the official name of the Persian-speakers of Iran in government papers (throughout the entire Qajar period), a fact that is mentioned in contemporary Western sources (for example in the XIVth edition of the German Brockhaus Enzyklopädie, 1894-1896, : "Bevölkerung. Die Bewohner (s. Tasel: Asiatische Völkertypen, Fig. 13, Bd. 1,S. 984), deren Gesamtzahl jetzt auf etwa 9 Mill. geschätzt wird, teilen sich in zwei Hauptmassen: Ansässige (Tadschik) und Nomaden (Ilat oder Ilyats). Die Tadschik, die mit verschiedenem fremdem Blute vermischten Nachkommen der alten Perser, Meder und Baktrier, bilden, wie in Ostiran und in Turan, die Hauptmasse der seßhaften, Ackerbau, Gewerbe und Künste treibenden Einwohnerschaft"; translation: "Population (of Persia): the population [...] whose total number is estimated to be ca. 9m, are devided into two main branches: sedentary (Tajik) and nomadic (Ilat or Ilyats). The Tajik who are the descendants of the old Persians, Medians and Bactrians, though mixed with much foreign blood, are, like in Eastern Iran and Turan, the main stratum of the sedentary, agricultural, trade and art carrying population.").
 * The Tajik spelling should stay in the lead. --Lysozym (talk) 10:34, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Your argument is flawed. Because Cyrus the Great is COMMONLY known as Koroush e bozorg in Farsi by majority Persian speakers (some 80 millions). As per Wikipedia majority rules it has to be included. However the Tajik variant of the name of the Ferdowsi is not common usage nor is it majority usage. It is a personal choice by a user or two.

Iran has always existed as either Persia or Iran, the central government and the central cultural centers in Pars/Fars have always been within Iran. Even if you make an argument on symantics then Iran has existed since the Qajar times and Tajikestan is only 20 yrs old. Again this is a misleading title because using his Tajik name is an attempt to imply that he is Tajik which is impossible since this ethnic group did not exist back then. Also using Persian instead of Tajik makes Ferdowsi a Persian not an Iranian by that logic so it has to stay that way.

Again the common usage (70+ millions vs. 2-3), fact that Tajik culture is a new development and did not exist at the time of Ferdowsi, the fact that Ferdowsi's own writing is in Persian/Farsi and the fact that every reputable source outthere cites his Persian name not his Tajik name means following Wikipedia common usage rules and common source dictate that his name stay Persian/Farsi.

Dr. Persi (talk) 00:49, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Dr. Persi's reasoning. I think his actual name should be named in Farsi which is his original name. As a matter of fact, the only way to write his name was in original Persian alphabet. Amirrezapsp (talk) 01:01, 27 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I wrote my reason and I'm not the person who added his name in Tajiki to this article (see the history of article). I will request a third-person opinion or send a request to dispute-resolution board. Because instead of participating in consensus, endless reverting started by Op-side and it seems that you didn't read this topic (even a bit of it). --Zyma (talk) 02:18, 27 March 2014 (UTC)


 * @ Mr. Persi: I do not understand why you are so much against the mentioning of the Tajik version of his name?! You make a big mistake by somehow assuming that the Tajik variant is "another name". Itis not. It is simply a transliteration of his name and it is identitcal to the Arabic spelling of name. There is no difference between "Tajik" and "Persian", it's two names for the SAME group of people. The Tajik spelling of his name is as correct as the Latin transliteration of his name.
 * Ferdowsi was as much "Tajik" as he was "Persian". It does not matter how old the Tajik script is. What matters is that there is a second variant of Persian and that it is the official language of a recognized nation. Ferdowsi belongs to the culture and identity of Tajikistan as much as he belongs to that of Iran and Afghanistan. Just mentioning the Tajik variant of Persian does not change ethnic identities or whatever. The Tajik variant is also mentioned in other articles, such as Rudaki - the father of Persian literature. It's not abouzt ethnic identity, but about the cultural and linguistic meaning. I totally disagree with this annoying "Islamic Republic Iran"-centric argumentation. During Ferdowsi's life-time, the Islamic Republic of Iran did not exist either - in fact, no modern nation-state existed back then.
 * It's funny that at least 4 different Latin transliterations of his Arabic laqab are given, although - strictly speaking - only the spelling Firdowsi is correct (reflecting both the initial [i] as well as the original diphtong) and although no standardized script is being used, while the standardized and correct Tajik transliteration - the official transliteration of his name in Tajik school books - is being blended out. That's perhaps the most unencyclopedic decision at all. --Lysozym (talk) 21:43, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

The lead
As it is now it says: "Hakim Abu ʾl-Qasim Ferdowsi Tusi (Tus, 940-1020 CE), highly revered Persian poet and the author of the epic of Shahnameh - the Persian "Book of Kings" - which is the world's longest epic poetry created by a single poet, and the national epic of Iran and the Persian speaking world. Having drafted the Shahnameh under patronage of the Samanid and the Ghaznavid courts, Ferdowsi is celebrated as one of the most influential Persian poets of all time, and an influential figure in Persian literature."

We are told that he is a "highly revered Persian poet" and then a few words later that he is "celebrated as one of the most influential Persian poets of all time". That's clearly redundant and I think overkill. I think we can just call him "poet and the author of..." as we point out a sentence later that he is " celebrated as one of the most influential Persian poets of all time". Dougweller (talk) 13:51, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Agree. --Lysozym (talk) 17:56, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Wrong Information Quotes
The couplet under "Influence" has not been composed by Ferdowsi. This couplet cannot be found at any manuscript of Shanama of course. Probably that couplet has been composed politically, however it has never appeared at any edited version of Shahnama neither. I mean this couplet that is at your page: بسی رنج بردم در این سال سی - عجم زنده کردم بدین پارسی — Preceding unsigned comment added by Farhad.vedad (talk • contribs) 14:37, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * We can't say it isn't by Ferdowsi without a source saying that, but as it isn't sourced in any case, I've removed it. It should not be replaced without an excellent source. Dougweller (talk) 16:30, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Length of poem
Include a line or two about the length of the Shahnameh. It is cited as the 'world's longest epic poetry written by a single poet' is it not? 60, 000 verses I believe? Why not mention it in the article? Unless I missed it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.79.143.139 (talk) 23:55, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Suggestions
'Having drafted the Shahnameh under patronage of the Samanid and the Ghaznavid courts of Iran, Ferdowsi is celebrated as the most influential figure in Persian literature and one of the greatest in the history of literature.'

Drafting the Shahnameh under the Samanid and Ghaznavid empires doesn't make Ferdosi the most celebrated figure in Persian literature. It just means that he published a book at a particular time and place. He can be celebrated because he wrote the longest poem or revived the language, or whatever, but having drafted something doesn't make him any more influential than the person who wrote that sentence. You need to explicitly state the significance of his work (e.g. longest poem, revived the language, influenced other writers, etc.). before following up with a praising statement.

'He is widely regarded as the greatest poet in the Persian language. '

This is repetitive and should be removed. You have already mentioned several times in the introduction that he:

-wrote longest epic poem -wrote national epic of Iran -celebrated as the most influential figure in Persian literature

'one of the greatest in the history of literature'

According to whom? And what is meant by 'history of literature' anyway? Are you comparing his work to every single piece of written work and claiming that he wrote one of the greatest works ever? Ridiculous. Ferdowsi is mentioned here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_literature but not as 'one of the greatest'.