Talk:Qajar Iran

Template:History of
Template:History of Azerbaijan should also be added to the infobox, considering that the modern-day territory of the Republic of Azerbaijan was part of Qajar Iran before the Russo-Persian Wars of 1804-1813 and 1826-1828, as well as the fact that the Qajar Dynasty was Turkic in ethnic origin. StalwartGrantist (talk) 15:24, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Disagree. Georgia and Armenia were also part of Qajar Iran - Imagine if we were to add every country template to empires which ruled multiple present-day countries. --HistoryofIran (talk) 15:47, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, but the modern-day Republic of Azerbaijan clearly has a stronger and more integral connection to Qajar Iran than either Georgia or Armenia do. StalwartGrantist (talk) 13:09, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * That argument could still be made for several countries which used to be part of an empire. Ultimately the article is called 'Qajar Iran' and is about the country of Iran, adding other templates fills up unnecessary space. --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:19, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Languages in inbox
It already indicated court language and mother tongue. Why add "dynastic/court", when that is the same thing and already stated? --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:01, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Same goes for adding "ethnicity" when origin is already listed. --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:12, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * "Ethnicity" and "origin" are not always the same thing. For example, the Safavid Dynasty of Iran was Kurdish in Patrilineal origin, but was largely Azerbaijani-Turkish and/or Persian in ethnicity and culture during the time of their reign. Another example would be the Shervashidze Dynasty of Abkhazia, who are (according to their traditional historical claim) Iranicized Arab in patrilineal origin, but Georgian/Abkhazian in ethnicity and culture. StalwartGrantist (talk) 13:07, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * "Dynastic" refers specifically to the ruling family, while "court" refers to most (but not all) of the nobility; the two words are different. StalwartGrantist (talk) 13:07, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Not really convincing, the terms are still more or less the same. --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:25, 8 October 2021 (UTC)


 * "while "court" refers to most (but not all) of the nobility"
 * Which is not what I asked. I asked, "Why add "dynastic/court", when that is the same thing and already stated?" Court language is already present in the infobox.


 * "Dynastic" refers specifically to the ruling family"
 * "Identities in Crisis in Iran: Politics, Culture, and Religion", by Ronen A. Cohen, page 14,"''Qajar dynasty was also Azeri Turkish but, apart from the initial rulers, few of their upper class used Turkish. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:08, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * So, I would say "mother tongue" as opposed to dynastic.--Kansas Bear (talk) 17:08, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Succeeded by
User:ThatDohDude, I can kind of see why you think that way but I still disagree. The Russian Empire wasn't a successor of the Qajars at all. Yes, the Russians took territory belonging to the Qajars but that does not mean they were succeeded by the Russians. Imperial Russia and Qajar Iran are two very different circumstances so it doesn't make much sense to say the Russians succeeded the Qajars. At least the Hotaks conquered the heartland of Iran and became/acted like the new rulers of Iran. but with Russia that isn't the case as they just took frontier provinces from the Qajars. If the Russians conquered all of Iran then they should be the successor of the Qajars, but they only took frontier areas from the Qajars and didn't attempt to be the successor of the Qajars politically, culturally, or socially. America took frontier provinces from Mexico, but that doesn't mean the Americans succeeded Mexico. The Durranis took territory from the Bukhara Emirate, but that doesn't mean the Durranis succeeded the Bukhara Emirate. And so on and so forth. Kailanmapper (talk) 17:03, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * User:Kailanmapper, I somewhat agree with you. I admit that it doesn't feel right saying that Qajar Persia was succeeded by the Russians, however, at the end of the day, they did take a big portion of the Caucuses region from the Qajars. Maybe a solution to this would be pointing out that the Russians only succeeded the Caucuses part of Persia? ThatDohDude (talk) 02:42, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I think that's fair. Kailanmapper (talk) 13:58, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Qajars
The Qajars’ native lands were not only in Gorgan but also in mazandaran as the map even illustrates. They constituted the ruling elite in mazandaran till at least the deposition of the royal branch of the Qajar tribe but in reality most likely still held significant power up to the land reform of 1963. It therefore should be mentioned that the great number of Qajars that settled in Gorgan, also settled in mazandaran or at least later on relocated to mazandaran. Too, I would be happy if it could be mentioned that Agha Mohammad Qajar’s father, Mohammad Qajar, was killed by a relative of his, Mohammad Khan Dadvey from the Develu branch of the Qajar tribe. Cheers! 77.64.143.197 (talk) 13:46, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 7 January 2024

 * The following is a closed 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. – robertsky (talk) 10:07, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Qajar Iran → Qajar Empire – "Qajar Empire" would be the standard naming convention for this kind of article which focuses on the political entity, its dynastic evolution, its foreign conflicts and diplomatic relations and its global national characteristics. The grammatical form "periodic adjective+country" (as in "Qajar Iran", "Napoleonic France", "Qing China", "Norman England"...) is rarely used on Wikipedia (they are usually redirects), and if it existed for independent articles would more naturally refer to a sociological article about the state of a country and its population during a certain time period (discussing demographics, economy, popular culture... almost to the complete exclusion of dynastic or diplomatic history). पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra)  (talk) 10:17, 7 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose per WP:WHATABOUT and WP:COMMONNAME. Not that it matters per the first rule, but we have articles just like this too (Bagratid Armenia). The split that led to this name showed this name's prominence in high quality WP:RS.


 * Google Scholar; "Qajar+Iran" (31,800 results ) - Qajar+Persia (21.500 results ) - Qajar+Empire (15.100 results )
 * JSTOR: "Qajar Iran" (5.553 results ) - "Qajar Empire" (2.671 results ) - "Qajar Persia" (2.599 results )
 * Brill Publishers: "Qajar Iran" (1,595 results ) - "Qajar Empire" (1,058 results ) - "Qajar Persia" (977 results )
 * Taylor & Francis: "Qajar Iran" (1,796 results ) - "Qajar Persia" (1,795 results ) - "Qajar Empire" (1,170 results )

That equals to 40,744 results for "Qajar Iran" and 19,999 results for "Qajar Empire".

Leading academics and scholars in this field have all published books with this name;

HistoryofIran (talk) 10:59, 7 January 2024 (UTC)


 * It's not a question of Google counts, but a question of semantics, as explained in the nomination above. "Qajar Iran" is a fairly current expression, but it would normally tend to refer to the geographical area of Iran at the time of the Qajars (demographics, social conditions, economy, popular culture...), whereas "Qajar Empire" refers to the polity, its structure, its policies, its control of various territories and ethnicities, its relations with the outside world (wars, diplomacy) etc... By the way, "Qajar Iran" is unduely restrictive in the context of this article, as the Qajar Empire also ruled over other areas such as parts of Georgia, parts of Afghanistan etc... which are amply dealt with here and are definitely not Iran. The content of the current article best corresponds to the title "Qajar Empire", and it is also the Wikipedia standard naming for this type of articles. पाटलिपुत्र  (Pataliputra)  (talk) 19:27, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * You've already been told this before (countless times in fact...), but please stop making up your own rules and meanings, and instead follow the ones in Wikipedia. Qajar Iran refers to the period when Iran was under Qajar rule, whilst "Qajar Empire" does the same, that's it. The name of their realm was "Iran", not Georgia, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc... it's literally mentioned in the article, there's even a separate article about it . This is akin to back when you said that readers might confuse the "Muslim conquest of Persia" with the Iran–Iraq War, pure conjecture. This is like moving Kingdom of Prussia, Kingdom of Hungary, Kingdom of Aksum, etc too because they ruled other land too. Article names are based on WP:COMMONNAME, and "Qajar Iran" is clearly the most dominant here. As you were told just a few months ago in the mess that you made at Talk:Maurya Empire; Stop with the non-stop OR.. Your claims directly contradict history, academic sources and the rules on this site. HistoryofIran (talk) 19:35, 7 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Note: WikiProject Iran has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:15, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: WikiProject Georgia (country) has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:16, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: WikiProject Azerbaijan has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:16, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: WikiProject Armenia has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:16, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: WikiProject Russia has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:17, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: WikiProject Former countries has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:17, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Oppose, I don't see any policy-based reason for the move. Meager examples of titles is not sufficient to draw a definite pattern, which is not the equivalent of a rule that must be followed. HistoryofIran has demonstrated that this is the common name. Aintabli (talk) 03:37, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose as per the sound arguments provided by HistoryofIran, in line with WP:COMMONNAME and WP:RS. Wikipedia titles are crafted based on these guidelines, rather than (with all due respect) relying on subjective opinions and baseless analogies. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:55, 8 January 2024 (UTC)