Template:Vital article

Iranian background

On Khwarizmi's Iranian(Persian) background from an involved reader of the concensus

His nationality is not persian

Well, it looks like there's a misunderstanding here.Although I changed this page by stating with sources that Khwarezmi is Turkic, you insisted, so I will make my voice heard from here.All the sources that claim that Khwarizmi is Persian are based on Toomer, but the reason that Toomer thinks that Khwarizmi is Persian is because Toomer was mistaken that Khwarizmi believed in Zoroastrianism in his youth.Because Toomer misread the letter "waw" when reading Tabari's sources, he thought two different people were the same person,because Toomer incorrectly read the letter "waw",another Muhammad ibn Musa, who was a Zoroastrian, and Muhammad ibn Musa, whom we call Khwarizmi He confused Moses.The Khwarezmi were born in a place called Sogdia, and the Sogdians fled south during the Arab Invasion 200 years before the Khwarezmi, Turks and Sogdians lived in Transaxonia, the Sogdians migrated south, and the rest assimilated by the Turks(source: Divanü Lügati't Turk Vol. I, page 30).Again, in the Divan-ı Lugati't Turk, the place where Khwarezmi was born is also Decontaminated as the place where Turks lived, and there are only 200 years between them.Has the whole Transaxonia become a Turkic homeland in 200 years?I think you should research the word Turkification on the Wiki.I would like to ask the wiki authorities to take this comment into account and register Khwarezmi as Turkic.

Isn’t it clear that he was khawarizmian not persian ?

His name means 'the native of Khwarazm', he was khawarizmian, the article itself confess that, it’s known that khawarizmians were iranians but they were not persians, no cited source or mentioned information ever claimed that any of his parents were persians or persians who moved to khawarizm Ibn Siwa (talk) 14:02, 4 January 2023 (UTC) <--- blocked sock of User:Amr.elmowaled[reply]

I guess those 6 citations supporting that he was Persian must be my imagination then? Please refrain from spamming talk pages with WP:SOAPBOX / WP:JDLI like comments, as you just did another talk page [1]. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:30, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I debated your sources brother.Toomer just mistaken thats all. 88.245.245.245 (talk) 15:12, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why dont you argue with me about this? 88.245.245.245 (talk) 17:54, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why did I just tell History of Iran, "I have sources that Khwarizmi is Turkish, if you want, we can discuss it." the response I said was deleted? Moreover, there were no insults and curses. Why are you so scared? Ömeraasw (talk) 19:59, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't remove your nonsense, and the last thing I would be is being scared of you. An admin removed ur comment [2] - why? See WP:SOAPBOX and WP:FORUM. I'm not interested in discussions with you, your Toomer comment makes no sense, the so called historian (Besim Atalay) you based this bizarre "deduction" off is a random bloke, with zero reputation amongst scholars, you're also not a historian yourself, you're just a "regular" person like me. In Wikipedia we follow WP:RS, not our personal thoughts/deductions. The vast majority of WP:RS (which you, surprise, attempted to remove [3] [4] [5]) calls him Persian/Iranian, end off. See WP:POV. --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:13, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 3 March 2023

al-Khwarizmi is not a Persian polymath at all! He's not even Persian! Urinboyev (talk) 05:08, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 19:21, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 22 July 2023

Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi → Al-Khwarizmi – This is the main application of this word. Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 15:09, 21 July 2023 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 04:26, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support: The current name is a mess. For a start, he is typically known by the kunya "Abu Jafar ..." before Muhammad, so the current title is neither first name + last name, nor his full name, but fairly arbitrarily includes his nisbah but not his kunya. Better, as suggested, to simply use the nisbah for which the subject is already the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:36, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support: as per Wikipedia:COMMONNAME Abo Yemen✉ 09:47, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose “Al-Khwarizmi” is a broad term, a nisba that means “from Khwarazm” and is used by other figures from Khwarazm too, eg [6]. HistoryofIran (talk) 12:58, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@HistoryofIran Hi, «is a broad term» is true, but this is the main application of this range. Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 13:16, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@HistoryofIran Other uses should have full name, not this use. Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 13:19, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Whenever someone says "Al-Khwarizmi", They 99.9% mean Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi and not Abū Bakr Muḥammad b. al-ʿAbbās al-Khwarizmi or Al-Khwarizmi al-Khati or Shuja al-Khwarazmi. The disambiguation page can be added to the hatnote (if it hasn't already been added there) Abo Yemen✉ 13:22, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support as the common name. Killuminator (talk) 11:32, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding clarifying his ethnicity as "Tajik/Persian"

Recently, I have been reading the book (https://cmes.fas.harvard.edu/publications/history-tajiks-iranians-east) where Prof. Richard Foltz clearly explains the origin of early Islamic Renaissance being Tajiks. Apparently, it is a term used Muslim Persians. Today, on the east, they still call themselves as "Tajiks". Hence, origin of the scholar needs to be clarified, along with the current name of his ethnicity as "Tajik/Persian" Wikihelperr134 (talk) 05:38, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Categories