Talk:Paykar Khan Igirmi Durt

Azeri name
Accusing other editors of vandalism is not helpful at all. Since the person was Turkic and the tribe to which he belonged played a role in the ethnogenesis of the Azerbaijani people, I see no problem in having an Azeri name along with a Persian one. --KoberTalk 11:33, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

"Played a role in the ethnogenesis of the Azerbaijani people". Not really, we can thank the Russians for that when they conquered parts of northern Iran. It was there the Azerbaijani group was formed. --HistoryofIran (talk) 11:47, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I don't quite understand what you mean. --KoberTalk 11:53, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

HistoryofIran, I warn you that you are very close to being reported for aggressive and bad-faith editing. Labeling edits, however misguided, as 'vandalism' violates Civility. The Igirmi Durt clan, that was native to what is now the Republic of Azerbaijan and not to Iran (see Islamic Encyclopedia), was key in governing the Beylarbeylik of Karabakh and the subsequent formation of the Azeri-ruled Karabakh Khanate (which had nothing to do with Armenia). As for the Turkic idiom of mediaeval Iran, it is an earlier version of modern Azeri, and any linguistic source on the matter will confirm that: "[Azeri] served as a lingua franca throughout much of the Caucasus region, eastern Turkey, and northwestern Iran from the 16th to the early 20th century". Ethnic Groups of North, East, and Central Asia: An Encyclopedia. I expect counter-arguments that the tribe "had nothing" to do with Azeris; otherwise I will have to undo your edit. Parishan (talk) 12:05, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Aggressive and bad-faith editing? that is very funny, especially the last word, "bad-faith editing". Alright I am sorry for calling you a vandal, can you stop overreacting now and stop accusing me of ridiculous thing such as bad-faith editing? (which is funny since you didn't like when i accused you of being a vandal, yet you accused me of bad-faith editing, i guess we could say that we are even) and only focus on the subject? thank you.

Dude, the source has two pages, can't you for a start tell me what page and what line? By looking at the article, it doesn't really state where his Turkic tribe was from, except that they were fighting for power in Karabakh (which is in Azerbaijan and Armenia). Furthermore, Just because a family is native to Azerbaijan doesn't mean that they should have the Azeri name written on their Wiki article. By using that logic, we should add the Azeri name on the Urdubadi family and many articles, which is simply not right. About the last source: So what? I am quite sure that the source isn't even reliable. --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:34, 8 March 2015 (UTC)


 * HistoryofIran, I would appreciate if you remained civil in your form of addressing fellow users. I am not your high school buddy for you to refer to me as 'dude'. That does not play well into the already unimpressive opinion of your manner of participating in discussions that I am starting to get.
 * The part I am referring to in the Encyclopedia of Islam is found at the end of the first paragraph under Kadjars (page 387, left column). Furthermore, notable Russian Orientalist (known for his 1985 University of New York-published work Islam in Iran) Ilya Petrushevsky described the Igirmi Durt of the sixteenth century as a conglomerate of Azeri and Azerified Kurdish tribes (later mixed into Azeris): page 71, so the use of the Azeri language is more than legitimate. Besides, it is not all about ethnicity; it is also about relevance to the country's historiography. Azeri-language sources make many more references to the Igirmi Durt clan than the Persian-language ones or English-language ones put together, so the Azeri name here would only be an asset.
 * I never said anything about the family name: I said that the Igirmi Durt clan was associated exclusively with Karabakh (which is located in Azerbaijan, not in Armenia) and was instrumental in ruling lands that saw centuries of Azeri statehood, which makes the person's relevance to Azerbaijan historically valid. I do not see how a Turkic Muslim historical figure originally from Karabakh, from a clan described as Azeri by a reliable source, would be relevant to Armenian history as much as he is relevant to Azerbaijani history. Parishan (talk) 14:19, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Oh my god... so now "dude" is a negative word? stop being so childish (that was aggressive too I guess). Want to know why I am saying that? well because I have already apologized (while you still haven't for accusing me of "bad-faith editing") and now you take the word "dude" as a negative word. Can you please stop this nonsense and instead fully focus on what really matters here? I'm trying to communicate with you and you are aren't really helping by overreacting that much. If you're going to target every normal word I use, then I don't think we can continue this discussion. Now let's get back to subject:

I took a look once more on the Encyclopedia of Islam source, and I don't really understand what you're trying to prove. About that Russian source, what line is it is says that? (Google Translate is my friend in this situation, just tell me what line). Karabakh is not in Armenia? well what is this then: '''Karabakh (Armenian: Ղարաբաղ Gharabagh or Արցախ, Artsakh; Azerbaijani: Qarabağ) is a geographic region in present-day eastern Armenia and southwestern Azerbaijan, extending from the highlands of the Lesser Caucasus down to the lowlands between the rivers Kura and Aras. It includes three regions: Highland Karabakh (historical Artsakh, present-day Nagorno-Karabakh), Lowland Karabakh (the southern Kura-steppes), and a part of Syunik.[1][2][3][4][5]'''

I won't say anything more until I have been answered about that source. --HistoryofIran (talk) 15:23, 8 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes, resorting unduly to informal language is considered negative; and no, I do not "want you to know why" you are saying that, I just prefer that you not say that at all. As far as our communication is concerned, I am a complete stranger to you; I may even be much older that you think, and I do not remember ever giving anyone an excuse to take such liberties in the way they address to me.
 * We are not talking about Karabakh the geographical region; we are talking about the Azeri clan of Igirmi Durt that ruled the political entity of Karabakh dominated entirely by Turkic-speaking Muslims for at least a few centuries, and in particular, at the time that this article refers to. Armenia is not in the picture here.
 * The Encyclopedia of Islam says that when the Kadjars reached northern Azerbaijan (i.e. Arran), they were joined there by the Igirmi Durt clan, which means that the Igirmi Durt clan is an integral part of Azerbaijani history which you are trying to deny.
 * Ilya Petrushevsky says this about the Igirmi Durt (you will find the text on page 71, first paragraph marked as "3" which is entirely dedicated to the Igirmi Durt clan; the following line comes after footnote #12): "В составе этого племенного объединения были не только азербайджанские, но и курдские мелкие племена, позднее ассимилировавшиеся с азербайджанцами." Translation: "This tribal conglomerate consisted not only of Azeri tribes, but also of smaller Kurdish tribes that later assimilated into the Azeris". He mentions Paykar Khan as the Emir of Karabakh and chief of Barda (which is a city in Azerbaijan) in the same paragraph. Parishan (talk) 19:22, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Parishan... if we are going to have a proper conversation, then you have to stop overreacting and acting so oversensitive. I wouldn't actually be surprised if you suddenly said: "omg pls dont talk to me it hurts my feelings." It is getting annoying now. You didn't see me freaking out when you accused me of "bad-faith editing". By the way I am busy in some other things right now unrelated to Wikipedia so I will be inactive for a FEW days (don't try anything funny, I will return). Meanwhile, you can think about what I said and ask yourself if you really want to continue without focusing on another irrelevant subject or not. --HistoryofIran (talk) 12:30, 10 March 2015 (UTC)


 * If you do not have anything to say about the content-related part of my comments, I consider this discussion over. You are more than welcome to present counter-arguments once you are back from your indefinite leave. Parishan (talk) 12:40, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Lucky you, I haven't gone yet: I do, but the question is, are you here to discuss about your personal feelings or the subject? --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:21, 10 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Indeed, there are. I have made numerous references to scientific sources above. I am waiting for your reaction. Parishan (talk) 23:07, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

I can't really be bothered to investigate the source right now (and hear about your poor feelings, but that does not mean that I will investigate it someday), so go ahead. I'm not here to waste time. --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:37, 11 March 2015 (UTC)