User talk:Behmod/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! &mdash; Khoikhoi 06:05, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Oghuz Turks
Hi Behmod,

Instead of deleting sentences, simply add tags so sourced can be provided. Thanks. &mdash; Khoikhoi 05:22, 26 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey Behmod, no problem. You're welcome. Another reason I wanted to add Khamenei was because I wanted an Azeri who was more of an Iranian nationalist rather than a separatist. You're right, we do need a woman. I'll try to think of someone eventually. Cheers. &mdash; Khoikhoi 17:58, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Turkish language
Hey Behmod,

I changed it back, thanks for correcting me. I suggest another person you talk to about the matter is User:Saposcat. BTW, you should always keep comments on this page. When it gets too big, you're welcome to archive it. Ciao. &mdash; Khoikhoi 02:46, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: "Ordu"
Hi, Behmod. Regarding the etymology of the word "ordu" (written in the old Ottoman Turkish script as اردو or اوردو ), I've checked a few different sources, both Turkish and English (as the English word "horde" descends from "ordu" as well), and it seems that the word is actually most likely of Turkic origin.

The specific text that you quote, being from the early 14th century, would not really indicate a Persian origin for the word insofar as, by that time, Turkic-speaking peoples had been in contact with Persian-speaking peoples for hundreds of years already.

Although I do agree with you (in your statement to Khoikhoi) that the number of Persian words still present in Turkish is vast (although some of the examples you gave him are no longer actually used, such as جنگ, which has been replaced by savaş), it seems that, in this case, "ordu" actually is in all likelihood a Turkic word. —Saposcat 08:55, 27 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Re your statement "This word ["ordu"] is a [Indo-European] and does not have Altaic origin. It has the same origin with heorde in old English, herd in modern English, herde in German and Kheordu in P.Gmc and other terms in other Indo-European languages." I'd be interested in knowing where you found this information, since it contradicts what I've found in a number of different English, Turkish, and French dictionaries.


 * Incidentally, "ordugâh" (اردوگاه) also exists in Ottoman Turkish, obviously borrowed directly from the Persian, and means "military camp" or "encampment" (گاه -gâh being a suffix meaning "place"). —Saposcat 17:35, 28 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey, Behmod, regarding the following statement you made on User talk:Mehrdadd: "a Turkish linguist told me that Turks borrowed the word 'Ordugah' from Iranians which is definitely a Persian word. It is a question for me, if they had 'ordu' why they adopted 'ordugah' from Persians?"


 * I guess I should have made myself clearer: they (the Ottomans) didn't borrow the entire word "ordugâh" (اردوگاه) per se; rather, the word "ordu" seems to have existed in Turkish already—insofar as it is probably of Turkic origin—but then, because of the way the Ottoman language worked (using a mix of Turkish, Persian, and Arabic plurals and suffixes and so forth), they added on the suffix گاه -gâh, meaning "place", which is a Persian suffix. Thus, the suffix is borrowed from Persian, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the entire word is (though it doesn't necessarily mean that it's not, either). Sorry that I didn't make that clear in my previous message here.


 * By the way, I'm not "a Turkish linguist", either. Good luck with your etymological hunting. —Saposcat 13:59, 1 June 2006 (UTC)


 * If, by your phrase "Turkish linguistic", you meant, "Do you know any Turkish linguists?", then the answer is unfortunately, "No, I don't". If you meant, "Are you familiar with the Turkish language?" (i.e., "Do you know Turkish linguistics?"), then the answer is, "Yes, I'm pretty familiar with how it works." I think you meant the former, though. Again, good luck with your research—or, as one would say in Turkish, kolay gelsin. —Saposcat 14:23, 1 June 2006 (UTC)


 * :) Okay; thanks for clearing that question up. Take care! —Saposcat 14:47, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Re: Reverting
Hi Behmod,

Can you clarify who you want to revert to? See the history page. Or do you just want to delete some info because it's already at Turkish people? &mdash; Khoikhoi 00:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, you're asking how to revert a page? It's quite simple - simple go to the history of a page, click on a version, such as "16:53, 29 May 2006", edit the page, and save it. Get it? In regards to the People of Turkey article, I guess the section should be changed to "History", as it is no longer brief. If things are redundant, you can delete them, and add it to the talk page to make sure you're correct. &mdash; Khoikhoi 00:54, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Your rough translation !
Behmod, Came across your so called rough translation on Grandmaster's page, it would be amusing if I didn't know the background for mis-translation !

Have you found the origin of the Horde, and Ordu yet ? Mehrdad 13:04, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

It is kind of you if you are teasing me
My discussion with GM was a discussion just to find actual accuracy, not a debate to prove my idea. If it is a Turkic word, I do not hesitate to accept it, but I need to study more about this subject, I do not want to talk without any references. Now, I am trying to track this word in Indo-European languages. If this word exists in old Indo-European languages, it supports that it has a Indo-European origin. If not it is a Altaic word. By the way, at the moment I found a word in Sanskrit(old Indian) that seems to be related to word ordu, but I want to make sure about it. But you know that the oldest mention of this word was in Iranian books and I could not find any older reference for his word in Turkic texts. --Behmod 13:41, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Behmod, I was just amused that how dishonest your so called scholarly discussion is going. I am Iranian too and know Farsi, so seeing the Turk and Turks all over those lines of that peom and seeing how you managed to translate Turk to the beautiful made me smile and shake my head. Please don't tell me the Turk in Farsi vocabulary means beautiful. If you have seen it in any Persian dictionary please let me know.

I am an Azeri and while ago one of Persian users here im Wikipedia asked me how come with a name such as "Mehrdad" I am  taking anti Iranian stance. I explained that i am not anti Iranian, in fact I have both Persian and Turkish background, as it goes for ancestry, but the truth is when i see how group of my own country men, trying to cover the truths and conspire to spread mis information I can't help but to be outraged. I find my Turkish friends are much more brave with Truth and I am only taking the side of the truth. As for the word Ordu, looking at my very average Readers Digest dictionary, under the word horde, it says: 1. A multitude, pack, or swarm, as of people, animals, insects, etc. 2. A tribe or clan of nomadic Mongols. 3. Any nomadic tribe or group. -v.i horded, hording To gather or live in a a horde. [<F<G<Polish horda < Turkish ordu campAkin to Urdu.

The name Urdu as the language in Pakistan is also derived from the same word (Ordu), since this language has been created in the course Turku Mongol rule of Moguls in Indian sub continent. It has Hindustani, Persian, Arabic, and to a lesser extent Turkish influences.

Hope it helps. Mehrdad 15:35, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Behmod, I got your message, my main point was about the translation of the poem by Khajawi Kermani :

در اردو هاياهوي ترکان

In this case Chanting of Beauties in the camps does not bare any possible meaning. He is talking of the Yaho یاهو chanted by Turkish warriors in the camp(Ordu). So it is very much related to the word we are discussing about.

I am well aware of different interpretation for the word Turk. The word Turk in classical Persian symbolises the beauty, power, sun, and in some lines by Rumi even symbolis god: Rumi:

پارسی گویم هین تازی بهل  --   هندوی آن ترک بش ای آب و گل

You who are made of worldly elements, go and be obedient (Indian) to god (Turk).

or Hafiz writes:

بیا که ترک فلک خوان روزه غارت کرد -- هلال  عید به دور قدح اشارت کرد

The sun brought the end of the fasting hours.

As for the Turkish in Mughal empire, you are quite right on the Persian influence as a literary language of the Moguls. But have to remember that Baber and descendants were Turk and in fact Babur's auto biography Baburnama is in Chagatai Turkish. Hope it helps.

Mehrdad 17:25, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

-
 * My Dear Brother. Read my answer in your page( Mehrdad )--Behmod 18:04, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Azerbaijani people
Hi again. It doesn't have citations, but I don't think it should be moved down. First off, Britannica says Azeris are a Turkic people, so that's why I think it should be mentioned first. Also, most ethnic groups articles have a genetics section at the end, mainly because genetics is a relatively new thing and we shouldn't base an entire article off of it. Perhaps we could find someone to provide citations. Those are just my thoughts. &mdash; Khoikhoi 05:00, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
I saw your contributions to the Azari talk page. Please continue to talk and add. I am an Azari. I have tried to explain that Azaris are Turkic-speaking Iranians. Certain users try and delete the facts we post that prove this. They are claiming that their is either a Turkic race or that the Azaris have nothing to do with Iran or any links. Please continue your good work. You seem neutral and fair. 72.57.230.179

Azeris
Hey Behmod. In case you haven't noticed, my friend Tombseye is about to rewrite the article, so I don't think it matters much. Feel free to revert if you want, however. &mdash; Khoikhoi 23:03, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

My work on Azeris
I thought you were an anon, so now I can actually respond to you. Look, the problem is that both Babak and Nezami are from the region of what is today Azerbaijan so I'm including them in the history section. I didn't say they were Azeri or not so there shouldn't be any problems. The painter is an Azeri so we can't do anything about that as that's just the way it is. And the Nezami statue caption explains that both Azeris and Iranians claim him as one of their own so there really shouldn't be any controversy as that's just the truth. The article is controversial b/c everyone wants their own way. I'm just trying to write from a neutral position as I have edited both the Iranian peoples (featured article now) and History of Azerbaijan and worked with both Iranians and Azeris and most support my work. If some people don't, then unless they can give valid reasons for changing, adding or deleting parts of the article, we'll just have to watch them and try to stop them. I mean I'm okay with a concensus view, if other editors think something is too controversial or wrong, I'll definitely respond. I do want to be fair to all parties involved afterall. Thanks for the comments. Tombseye 18:17, 10 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay. Tombseye 18:37, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Azeris
Actually, it would make more sense to first say Caucasian peoples and then Iranians if we are talking about the oldest to newest inhabitants. Also, they don't emphasize Iranian except in terms of culture whereas genetically many refer to the peoples of the Caucasus such as the Albanians and Armenians (as many genetic tests bear out). This is why we had the version we had before. Tombseye 22:33, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Regarding reversions made on February 23 2007 to Azerbaijani people
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. The duration of the block is 24 hours. — Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 06:24, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Origin and Ethnicity
Hey, welcome back. I'm sorry to have reverted you. It's just that I didn't agree with your edits, and I would prefer if we could get a consensus first before you revert again. Could you show me the whole text of the Britannica article? Where did it say that "Azeris originated from a combination of older inhabitants including Iranian peoples and others who had lived in Transcaucasia since ancient times"? Also, as a word of advice: never revert to Dariush4444. His edits are always biased. Please check the edit history of a page before making major edits. Bedrood Behmod. :-) Khoikhoi 10:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Azeris
It doens't make sense. Most sources state that Azeris are a Turkic people because they speak a Turkic language. Per WP:NPOV we can't give the other theories the same amount of weight. Khoikhoi 04:12, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

e-mail
Can you please enable your e-mail address so other editors can e-mail you? Merci aziz. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.103.83.34 (talk) 05:28, 26 February 2007 (UTC).

Hey
Yea, I'll get to it, but so far people are ignoring it. I'll make a post right now.Azerbaijani 19:17, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

300 Edits
Thanks for editing the 300 (film article). I recently removed your edit, replacing with that which was there before. The edits prior to yours kept arguing that "several" MPs wanted the film banned. Closer inspection of the actual article cited, clearly shows that only four were in favor of it. No mention of the other 286 MPs who did not sign on or care about the film. I offered the use of "a few," but people didn't seem to like that, and yet no one offered a better article that showed a change in that number. I decided to be specific, so as to allow the reader to make up their mind about whether 4/290 is a few, some or several. Hope that helps explain my edit. Cheers! Arcayne 23:00, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Hiya Behmod! I wanted to point out that you need to clean up the wording of the statement you reverted to remove NPOV statements.Otherwise, it will seesaw backand forth. Arcayne 00:13, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Something else to consider, buddy - does the review address some new point of historical inaccuracy, or does it reinforce those historical inaccuracies already noted? I ask this because we need to keep the size of the article down. If this is better than another citation in the article speaking against the movie's inaccuracies, then you should replace it with yours. If it is not, then you should remove it for the sake of bevity and avoiding repetitiveness. Arcayne 00:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I am sorry if you felt I was being unduly harsh, Behmod; that was certainly not my intention. I read throught he citation, and there wasn't anything new addressed in the comment. Had it been better than what was there, I would have replaced it with the one you added, but it didn't. It wasn't so much repeating the same quote as it was repeating the same problems with the accuracy and note as well as the other ones.
 * I don't want to discourage you, as I think you are trying to be conscientious (some people just rant and are unproductive, etc.). I would like to make a sugguestion to you - something to seek out. I have noticed that some people are contesting Touraj Daryaee's text as not being in keeping with the original account of Herodotus. I don't expect you to know Herodotus (I centainly didn't, untilI read the article) or or have read his accounting of the Battle of Thermopylae. I am concerned that when (or if) the comments are removed that there won't be anything to balance it out. Try to find a comment from an Near-Eastern (or Persian) scholar who has commented about 300, and how Herodotus was biased. No one else is looking for this, and I think it's going to get ugly when Daryaee's comments are found to not be as strong as we all thought. You can get a jump on the article by finding an alternative.
 * Of course, you don't have to do this, as it was just a suggestion. Let me know if I can help. Arcayne 03:06, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I remember Dr. Farrokh while I did my undergrad at Stanford. His work is solid and consistent. An excellent possible substitute, Behmod. Great work! I don't know what's keeping your otherwise occupied, but if I end up adding the text, I will cite you as the person who found it. :) Cheers!  Arcayne 20:43, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Azerbaijan (Iran)
You must engage in talk page discussion rather than reverting just hours after I unprotected the article. There hasn't been any talk page discussion in weeks. I'm going to unprotect the article again and block editors who revert from now; the article should not be in chronic protection because of a few unreasonable edit warriors. Use the talk page. Dmcdevit·t 02:04, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

On a similar note, there's was an ongoing discussion in the articles Roman-Persian War and Byzantine-Persian War that you just reverted to your POV. Please participate in Talk and mind WP:ATT before making edits, and avoid by all means instigating rv-wars. Miskin 22:31, 5 May 2007 (UTC)