body.skin-vector-2022 .mw-parser-output .skiptotalk,body.mw-mf .mw-parser-output .skiptotalk{display:none}.mw-parser-output .skiptotalk a{display:block;text-align:center;font-style:italic;line-height:1.9}.mw-parser-output .skiptotalk a::before,.mw-parser-output .skiptotalk a::after{content:"↓";font-size:larger;line-height:1.6;font-style:normal}.mw-parser-output .skiptotalk a::before{float:left}.mw-parser-output .skiptotalk a::after{float:right}Skip to table of contents

Page name[edit]

Can we correct the page name to be Ibn Sina's original name Abu Ali al-Husayn ibn Abillah ibn al-Hasan ibn Ali ibn Sina rather than Avicenna as known in the west.

Surely a person would rather be identified and recognised but his official birth name which historians have recorded as Abu Ali al-Husayn ibn Abillah ibn al-Hasan ibn Ali ibn Sina. For justification we can look at Al-Farabi's page, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Farabi where his page is named by his original name rather than the western name Alpharabius — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anaschillin (talk • contribs) 22:02, 5 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, this is the English Wikipedia, so the legit title is Avicenna. Your remark about Al-Farabi is irrelevant, since in English, he's called Al-Farabi, not Alpharabius. Best.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 22:30, 5 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is English Wikipedia, but we could have the decency to use Ibn Sina's name instead of some Latinate corruption of it. June-tree (talk) 17:07, 3 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What about Ibn Rushd who is known in the West as Averroes? We can simply change the name to Ibn Sina and have the search “Avicenna” be redirected to the page, just as is done on the Ibn Rushd page. This does not have anything to do with being “the English Wikipedia.” Abu Yagub (talk) 08:33, 9 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please see WP:COMMON NAME. Ibn Sina is commonly transliterated in English as Ibn Sina, never Avicenna. This page should be changed to Ibn Sina. --Sultanic (talk) 09:16, 16 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2021[edit]

The full name translation of Avicenna in the Name section is wrong. It should be "Abū ʿAlī al-Ḥusayn bin ʿAbdillāh bin al-Ḥasan bin ʿAlī bin Sīnā". Instead of "ibn", it should be "bin". The Arabic writing also uses "بن" (bin) instead of "ابن" (ibn) here. Amonthothra (talk) 01:34, 15 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Done Gaioa (T C L) 18:28, 18 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I respect your astute eye, but actually "ابن" and "بن", when used to signify the sequence of paternal ancestors, is always pronounced the same in formal Arabic (in English, "ibn"). However, some people remove the alif (ا) when writing the paternal sequence to lessen the repetition. In the end, though, the pronunciation in formal Arabic is always the same (ibn, never bin). Therefore, it should be Ibn Sina, not Bin Sina, especially since "Sina" is not preceded by another name (e.g. Osama bin Laden and not Osama ibn Laden, since "Laden" is preceded by "Osama"; although as I have mentioned, in formal Arabic, one would pronounce it as ibn despite the difference in writing). I will revert the edit you have made. Thanks! --Abu Yagub (talk) 17:06, 19 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ibn Sina (Persian: ابن سینا‎) is not a Persian word پورسینا Pour Sina[edit]

Ibn Sina (Persian: ابن سینا‎) is not a Persian word. It is Arabic. He is not called Ibn Sina, in fact he is Pour Sina not even Pur Sina! Whoever wrote this article had no proper understanding of Persian and English languages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShParsi (talk • contribs) 01:25, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fixed these concerns with my latest edit, thanks! :) --Abu Yagub (talk) 17:13, 19 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pur is a cat sound and is wrong.[edit]

Pour Sina is accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShParsi (talk • contribs) 01:28, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I have fixed this mistake. Thanks! --Abu Yagub (talk) 17:14, 19 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Section on Theology[edit]

In the section titled Theology, there is a reference to Al-Razi, that may not be correct. Apparently, Al-Razi had died prior to Avicenna's birth.

Extra information on Ibn Sina move to Urgench[edit]

Regarding Urgench, Ibn Sina moved to the Ma'munid dynasty after the fall of the Samanids. However there is no mention of this. Only the place 'Urgench'. Urgench is the same place as Gurganj which is where he moved to, mainly as the Ma'munids dynasty had close ties to the Samanids prior to their fall. The actual wiki page also mentions this hence its important to do the same vice versa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.28.199.31 (talk) 14:59, 25 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Removal of newly added material[edit]

User:HistoryofIran, you recently removed my addition to the article, stating WP:UNDUE and WP:OR as reason.

My additions (italics) were (in the lead) that Avicenna "was a Persian or Sogdian"[1][2][3]

In the section 'Early Life' I added that "Avicenna was born in Afshana, a village near Bukhara (in present-day Uzbekistan), in Sogdiana,[4] then the capital of the Samanids, a Persian dynasty in Central Asia and Greater Khorasan."

In the same section: "His mother, named Sitāra, was from Bukhara, a local that may be regarded as a Tajik.[5][6]

Finally, I reported Foltz's opinion that Avicenna's native language "may well have been Sogdian."[6]

I think there must be a mistake, because I don't see WP:OR, and I do not see WP:UNDUE.--Haldir Marchwarden (talk) 20:22, 17 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You were already told this by three editors various times in the talk page of Sogdia. Majority of the sources either dont state that Avicenna was Sogdian or they arent reliable. Yet you proceeded to add this here regardless, this is some next level Wikipedia:Tendentious editing. --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:31, 17 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You don't need to use bold characters History of Iran. What other editors had to say in the past in other articles doesn't matter. Otherwise I'd count all those who proposed other origins for Avicenna here and elsewhere in the past. You said: Majority of the sources either dont state that Avicenna was Sogdian or they arent reliable. Yet you proceeded to add this here regardless, this is some next level Wikipedia:Tendentious editing. That is not true. I also don't see how the claim that Avicenna's native language was Sogdian is WP:UNDUE in any stretch of imagination, since Foltz is the only scholar to have ever made statements in this regard.[6] I appreciated it when you changed your mind later on, but please try and not be aggressive from the start. I am going to fly a RfC if you still disagree with my addition, so I advise you to focus on the matter at hand, providing sources for your claims, and to explain how what I added is "original research" and WP:UNDUE? Thanks.--Haldir Marchwarden (talk) 20:42, 17 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

References

  1. ^ Corbin, Henri (1998). The Voyage and the Messenger Iran and Philosophy. Translated by Joseph H. Rowe. North Atlantic Books. p. 40. ISBN 9781556432699. Each author naturally retains traces of his cultural origin: Avicenna was a Sogdian whose family came from Bactria
  2. ^ Ferro, Marc (2000). La colonización una historia global. Translated by Joseph H. Rowe. Siglo XXI. p. 208. ISBN 9789682322228. Spanish:Correspondiendo más o menos a la antigua Sogdiana, hogar de una civilización que dio origen a Avicena y Firdusi, la región tayika fue durante mucho tiempo el motivo de una rivalidad entre Bujara y Kokan. (English: Roughly corresponding to ancient Sogdiana, home to a civilization that gave rise to Avicenna and Firdusi, the Tajik region was for a long time the reason for a rivalry between Bukhara and Kokan.)
  3. ^ Caselli, Giovanni [in Italian] (2004). La lirica italiana e l'irredentismo da Goffredo Mameli a Gabriele d'Annunzio. Zeb89 productions SAS Kenneth Caselli. p. 54. ISBN 8875390355. Avicenna was only the most famous of many Sogdian scientists
  4. ^ Guarnieri, Massimo (2019). Da Habilis a Jobs: due milioni di anni con la tecnologia. Società Editrice Esculapio. p. 220. ISBN 9788835303930. Abū 'Alī al-Husayn ibn 'Abd Allāh ibn Sīnā (latinizzato in Avicenna, Sogdiana, 980–1037) fu uno scienziato universale, uno dei più grandi di ogni tempo e massimo medico medioevale
  5. ^ Amr, Samir S.; Tbakhi, Abdelghani. "Ibn Sina (Avicenna): The Prince Of Physicians". Annals of Saudi Medicine, NCBI. Archived from the original on 15 September 2021. Retrieved 15 September 2021. [Avicenna's] father, Abdullah, was from the city of Balkh and worked as a local governor for a village near Bukhara. His mother was a Tadjik woman named Sitara.
  6. ^ a b c Foltz, Richard. "Interview with Richard Foltz on the history of Tajiks". caa-network.org. Archived from the original on 16 September 2021. Retrieved 16 September 2021. interviewer: What do you think about all current disputes on ethnicity of scientists and poets of time, as well as heritage claims for cities, like Bukhara, Samarqand, Marv, etc.? If, for example, Imam Bukhari or Avicenna's native language or first language was Persian, and Persian-speakers of time used to be named "Tajiks", do Tajiks have right to call them sons of their nation? Foltz: I think the native language of Bukhari and Ibn Sina may well have been Sogdian, but they surely learned both Persian and Arabic in their childhood. But by the usage of the time they would have been considered Tajiks, so I see no problem in considering them that way today. The idea of "nation", however, as it is used now, is much more recent, dating only back to the French Enlightenment. People didn't think in those terms in the 10th century. ((cite web)): |archive-date= / |archive-url= timestamp mismatch; 17 September 2021 suggested (help)

RfC[edit]

SNOW
I am boldly closing this. Haldir has been indeffed for socking, and it's snowing. (non-admin closure) dudhhrContribs 18:37, 22 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The following discussion 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.

Should newly added content be regarded as WP:OR and WP:UNDUE, and may/should it be included in the article? Please, specify whether you are pro/against adding all the new material or which of the four pieces information you are pro and against.--Haldir Marchwarden (talk) 20:53, 17 September 2021 (UTC) [a]Reply[reply]

  1. Ibn Sīnā, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition - He was born in 370/980 in Afshana, his mother's home, near Bukhara. His native language was Persian
  2. Medicine is a science by which we learn about the conditions of the human body. Its purpose is to preserve health when well and restore health when ill;’ a famous definition of medicine by the Persian polymath of the eleventh century, Avicenna. - Reflections on Avicenna’s impact on medicine: his reach beyond the Middle East
  3. We have rubais by Avicenna (d. 428/1037), the greatest of the Persian philosophers, whom 'Umar regarded as his master and whose encyclopaedic work - Cambridge History of Iran, vol 4
  4. Many of these achievements were later collated and made known in the West through the writings of another Persian, the great Avicenna (born Ibn Sina, 980–1037). A History of Iran, Axworthy, page 81
  5. Abu ‘Ali al-Hasan Ibn Sina (ca. 980–1037 CE), known in Latin as Avicenna, was a physician, natural philosopher, mathematician, poetic mystic, and princely minister. Of Persian descent, he was born in Afshana in the province of Bukhara - p 369, Medieval Islamic Civilization: An Encyclopedia, Volume 1
  6. This books deals with the philosophy of Ibn Sina - Avicenna as he was known in the Latin West - a Persian Muslim - Avicenna's Al-Shifā': Oriental Philosophy
--HistoryofIran (talk) 21:17, 17 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What about the pieces about it being possible to call his mother a Tajik[5][6] and his native language may well have been Sogdian?[6] Claims that his mother was anything other than Tajik/Sogdian don't seem to be ubiquitous, and I saw only one source saying his native language was Persian. Foltz, who differently from Gutas is proposing something, not rejecting it, is quite reliable, and his proposal makes sense given context and the other sources provided.[4][2][1][3]--Haldir Marchwarden (talk) 10:20, 18 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
See the thing is that since sources don't really care about where his mother was from, neither should we (that is the true meaning of WP:NPOV: we say as much and as little as the sources do). I thought for a while about using "Iranian" rather than "Persian", but that would be unduly applying a linguistic category (Sogdian was an Eastern Iranian language) to a statement of cultural background (kind of like when people used to speak about 'Semites', as if the linguistic category meant anything at all in cultural terms; this should really be avoided). Given the skepticism of a top-tier expert like Gutas, I would perhaps consider supporting replacing "Persian" by "Muslim", but then I also think that "Persian" is fine given the fact that Avicenna lived at the start of the 10th/11th century Persian Renaissance and clearly lived and worked in that cultural atmosphere. That's also probably why the sources speak so easily about "Persian", and as long as no expert comes up to explicitly refute this, we should follow that general tendency in the sources. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 16:25, 18 September 2021 (UTC) PS I'm glad you find my comment reasoned, but it would be nice if you, once you are unblocked, also would stick to reasoned comments on talk pages rather than taking refuge to disruptive editing and personal attacks. Thanks.Reply[reply]

References[edit]

  1. ^ a b Corbin, Henri (1998). The Voyage and the Messenger Iran and Philosophy. Translated by Joseph H. Rowe. North Atlantic Books. p. 40. ISBN 9781556432699. Each author naturally retains traces of his cultural origin: Avicenna was a Sogdian whose family came from Bactria
  2. ^ a b Ferro, Marc (2000). La colonización una historia global. Translated by Joseph H. Rowe. Siglo XXI. p. 208. ISBN 9789682322228. Spanish:Correspondiendo más o menos a la antigua Sogdiana, hogar de una civilización que dio origen a Avicena y Firdusi, la región tayika fue durante mucho tiempo el motivo de una rivalidad entre Bujara y Kokan. (English: Roughly corresponding to ancient Sogdiana, home to a civilization that gave rise to Avicenna and Firdusi, the Tajik region was for a long time the reason for a rivalry between Bukhara and Kokan.)
  3. ^ a b Caselli, Giovanni [in Italian] (2004). La lirica italiana e l'irredentismo da Goffredo Mameli a Gabriele d'Annunzio. Zeb89 productions SAS Kenneth Caselli. p. 54. ISBN 8875390355. Avicenna was only the most famous of many Sogdian scientists
  4. ^ a b Guarnieri, Massimo (2019). Da Habilis a Jobs: due milioni di anni con la tecnologia. Società Editrice Esculapio. p. 220. ISBN 9788835303930. Abū 'Alī al-Husayn ibn 'Abd Allāh ibn Sīnā (latinizzato in Avicenna, Sogdiana, 980–1037) fu uno scienziato universale, uno dei più grandi di ogni tempo e massimo medico medioevale
  5. ^ a b Amr, Samir S.; Tbakhi, Abdelghani. "Ibn Sina (Avicenna): The Prince Of Physicians". Annals of Saudi Medicine, NCBI. Archived from the original on 15 September 2021. Retrieved 15 September 2021. [Avicenna's] father, Abdullah, was from the city of Balkh and worked as a local governor for a village near Bukhara. His mother was a Tadjik woman named Sitara.
  6. ^ a b c d e Foltz, Richard. "Interview with Richard Foltz on the history of Tajiks". caa-network.org. Archived from the original on 16 September 2021. Retrieved 16 September 2021. interviewer: What do you think about all current disputes on ethnicity of scientists and poets of time, as well as heritage claims for cities, like Bukhara, Samarqand, Marv, etc.? If, for example, Imam Bukhari or Avicenna's native language or first language was Persian, and Persian-speakers of time used to be named "Tajiks", do Tajiks have right to call them sons of their nation? Foltz: I think the native language of Bukhari and Ibn Sina may well have been Sogdian, but they surely learned both Persian and Arabic in their childhood. But by the usage of the time they would have been considered Tajiks, so I see no problem in considering them that way today. The idea of "nation", however, as it is used now, is much more recent, dating only back to the French Enlightenment. People didn't think in those terms in the 10th century. ((cite web)): |archive-date= / |archive-url= timestamp mismatch; 17 September 2021 suggested (help)

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Namely (italics): (in the lead) "[Avicenna] was a Persian or Sogdian"[1][2][3] (Early Life) "Avicenna was born in Afshana, a village near Bukhara (in present-day Uzbekistan), in Sogdiana,[4] then the capital of the Samanids, a Persian dynasty in Central Asia and Greater Khorasan." (Early life) "His mother, named Sitāra, was from Bukhara, a local that may be regarded as a Tajik.[5][6] (Early life) "Avicenna's native language may well have been Sogdian."[6]
  2. ^ Corrected "latter" to "later" and summarized middle part (not in green).
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.

Semi-protected edit request on 18 September 2021 - grammar error[edit]

Change chapter 'Adulthood', second sentence, from 'By the time Avicenna was at least 21 years old, he father died' to 'By the time Avicenna was at least 21 years old, his father died'. Removing grammar error. Janusz-Osoba (talk) 12:34, 18 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Done Peaceray (talk) 16:19, 18 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 23 September 2021[edit]

Avicenne born in Balkh Afghanistan Fahizkarimi (talk) 20:47, 23 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yea right Fahizkarimi (talk) 20:48, 23 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:54, 23 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 27 September 2021[edit]

Replace all instances of "Avicenna" to Ibn Sina (his correct name) except where stating it's Latin corruption/Latinization to Avicenna. It's a small change but an accurate one. (No one even speaks Latin anymore; people still speak Arabic) 142.150.72.151 (talk) 22:12, 27 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the ((edit semi-protected)) template. That's a pretty significant change. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:17, 27 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Invention of steam distillation by Avicenna[edit]

There is a claim that steam distillation was invented by Avicenna which makes the rounds in all kinds of non-expert sources, and now also in our articles on distillation and steam distillation. However, I have not been able to find a truly reliable source for this. If it the claim is true, which I do not itself dispute, we should be able to find it in a work written by a historian of alchemy and chemistry, or by another historian of science. From WP:CONTEXTMATTERS: The reliability of a source depends on context. Each source must be carefully weighed to judge whether it is reliable for the statement being made in the Wikipedia article and is an appropriate source for that content. I do not consider the sources currently cited in the articles referred to above to be appropriate for the content, and therefore not reliable in context. We should either find a better source, or remove the statement. Any help with this would be appreciated (I posted a similar message to Talk:Distillation and Talk:Steam distillation). ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 14:42, 15 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wrong Section[edit]

The section header for "Other Contributions" should be moved in front of the subsection "Earth Sciences". --84.189.84.17 (talk) 13:57, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The organization of the content is admittedly pretty bad here, but the stuff above 'Other contributions' purports to describe the contents of the Kitab al-Shifa, while the stuff under 'Other contributions' concerns contributions appearing in other works (though partly also in the Kitab al-Shifa). Just moving the section header is therefore not a viable option.
By the way, in the future you might want to use the ((edit semi-protected)) template. It notifies experienced editors that someone has requested a change on a semi-protected page like this. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 02:49, 1 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see now. I was assuming that the book in question was about medicine, not about a lot more. Thanks for clarifying.
If you block the article, the onus is on you (not personally) to make it work. If someone reads this and refuses to change the article just because a template is missing, this person should immediatle stop working on the Wikipedia for good. --84.189.84.17 (talk) 20:30, 3 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, surely any autoconfirmed user passing by the article may answer a request (like I did), it's just that when you use the ((edit semi-protected)) template, another user is guaranteed to answer your request (and rather quickly too) because the request is then placed on a special list watched by experienced users. That may not happen on many of the poorly watched or un-watched pages out there, where without a template your message may remain wholly unread for months, if not years... ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 20:43, 3 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That would be a pretty silly case, blocking a page with nobody watching it. Par for the course for Wikipedia, I guess. --84.189.84.17 (talk) 01:32, 4 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Suggested correction, 14th century not 13th[edit]

Under medieval section

"As early as the 13th century when Dante Alighieri depicted him in Limbo alongside the virtuous non-Christian thinkers in his Divine Comedy"

The Divine Comedy was written in 1320, so it is 14th Century not 13th. Mikelwiki575 (talk) 00:31, 8 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Done @Mikelwiki575: in the future, please consider using the ((edit semi-protected)) template: this is the perfect counterexample, but normally the template gets things done more quickly. Thanks! ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 00:40, 8 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Birthplace[edit]

Ibn Sina who is known as Abu Ali Sina Balkhi was born in Balkh (current Afghanistan) instead of Bukhara that has been recorded here.— Preceding unsigned comment added by ZakiFrahmand1 (talk • contribs) 07:11, 13 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@ZakiFrahmand1: reliable sources widely record that he was born in Afshana, a village near Bukhara. His nisba al-Balkhī derives from the fact that his father Abd Allah was a native of Balkh, as also recorded by reliable sources and mentioned in the article.
In the future, please add new comments to the bottom of the page (or use the 'new section' button at the top of the page). Please also don't forget to sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~). Thanks! ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 12:27, 13 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Where is the link to your relaible sources?
I think he was born in greater balkh. 2001:14BB:69C:4405:34B2:7BC5:987F:80E1 (talk) 20:14, 17 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Origin of Ibn Sina[edit]

Though he has written a few works in persian, it was most probably used to convey literature just as arabic. His first language was most probably sogdian. In this sense, he would be "persian" only in the frequent meaning in english that Persia means the whole ancient Iran. Wouldn't, however, other identifications as of Sogdian, Iranian, Central Asian, from present Uzbekistan, also arabic, as being the language of most of his work, be also relevant? 191.210.246.4 (talk) 14:26, 9 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, but we base our info on academic sources, not the personal opinion of users. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:32, 9 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Was he a persian ?[edit]

It’s known and mentioned in the article that his father was native to the city of balkh, that makes him a tajik not a persian, it’s known that tajiks were called persians and both names were used as synonyms to them but they are not the same ethnically, these differences do matter today, for some reason there is some sort of persianization of scientists of non-persian iranian ethnic groups Ibn Siwa (talk) 13:28, 4 January 2023 (UTC) <--- blocked sock of User:Amr.elmowaledReply[reply]

The sources in the article contradict you. And to make it worse you have posted zero sources to back your claims. --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:31, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

::Who are/were the native ethnic group of balkh ? Ibn Siwa (talk) 15:11, 4 January 2023 (UTC) <--- blocked sock of User:Amr.elmowaledReply[reply]

This is impossible to know. The ethnicity then was not the ethnicity now. All we have are sources referring to him as Persian. WP:RS Game Set Match. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:21, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It should be purged from the lead though per mos:ethnicity. Wiqi(55) 16:39, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That makes no sense at all.
Greeks may not be the Greeks of the antiquity but that doesn't make them not Greek. The same for Persians.
Ibn-Sina's heritage is as important as Aristotle's was. He should be referred as a Persian polymath. 2607:FEA8:55DF:FC8A:8C6D:42C2:1616:4D24 (talk) 02:28, 5 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Persian name of Ibn Sina[edit]

Hello all, I had a recommendation in regards to the name of Ibn Sina in Persian. As you all know, "Ibn" is an Arabic suffix to which there are Persian equivalents. In some Persian sources, Ibn Sina is called Pour Sina, Pour meaning the same thing as Ibn. I am curious to see if anyone thinks it would be appropriate to include پور سینا (pour Sina) in addition to Ibn Sina, which is also included in the Persian version of this article. Thank you.

Sources:

http://www.parsianjoman.org/wp-content/uploads/ParsiSareh.pdf (Page numbers of PDF: 25, 34,) (The article is in Persian)

https://www.iranketab.ir/book/63551-poorsina (Persian book that uses "Pour Sina" and not "Ibn Sina" in the title)

https://abadis.ir/fatofa/%D9%BE%D9%88%D8%B1-%D8%B3%DB%8C%D9%86%D8%A7/ (Scroll down to see the Dehkhoda Dictionary entry)MarkParker1221 (talk) 22:05, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done for now: - This seems like the sort of question that should be a discussion, rather than an uncontroversial edit request. PianoDan (talk) 17:49, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Change name from Avicenna to Ibn Sina[edit]

While it is important to acknowledge that Ibn Sina is known (erroneously) as Avicenna in the West, having the article title as "Avicenna" and referring to him in the article as "Avicenna" rather than his actual name, Ibn Sina, is an erasure of his identity as a non-European. Ibn Sina is his actual name, Avicenna is the Latin corruption of his name. This is the equivalent of if we went to Shakespeare's Wikipedia page and renamed him to Sheikh Zabyir. The argument that "this is the English Wikipedia, so therefore we call him Avicenna" has no merit, as there are many Wikipedia articles about individuals named "Yusuf" without them being renamed to the English/Latin version of "Joseph". Aaleem912 (talk) 21:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please see WP:COMMON NAME and WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. It's just how his name is commonly transliterated in English, nothing too deep - no one is denying his "non-European" identity. --HistoryofIran (talk) 21:38, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If it's nothing too deep as you say, it should be fixed. The title should be his name rather than a European misunderstanding of it. Presenting his actual name is the neutral choice here.
I also disagree to the applicability of the "right great wrongs" article (which seems to be about verification). Noting how this article got Ibn Sina's name wrong and how it relates to eurocentrism is good, as these are things we should be thinking about in order to be respectful. June-tree (talk) 17:38, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nevertheless, WP:COMMONNAME is our policy, & we adhere to policies. Ibn Sina is first noted in the article, but people are most likely to search for the common name & expect to see the article name be the same as the common name. Peaceray (talk) 17:52, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I took a look at some of the policy on names, and I saw that "article titles with non neutral terms cannot simply be a name commonly used in the past, it must be the common name in current use." Just from looking around online it seems like he is often referred to as Ibn Sina, so Avicenna isn't the name, and it seems to hit all 5 criteria for the common name policy. As Avicenna is a Latin European corruption of his name it doesn't seem to fit my notion of neutral.
I am new to this so forgive me if I'm misreading or missing more context (wow, there's a lot of policy!), but the apparent compliance with policy and it seeming more respectful and avoiding as much Eurocentric bias feel like good reason for a title change. People searching for Avicenna can just be redirected and learn his actual name. June-tree (talk) 20:23, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Correction[edit]

Needs correction:

His father was from Balkh. Balkh is a very famous city located in present day Afghanistan not Turkmenistan. You can confirm it with a quick and short Google search. I was born in Afghanistan that's why I am sure what I am talking about. 2607:FEA8:BA5:C450:8D76:240A:3F2B:21EC (talk) 14:49, 23 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, I don't mean to sound harsh here but; in Wikipedia we follow WP:RS, not random Google searches. Being from Afghanistan doesn't give you a PHD in history, especially since Avicenna has no relation to Afghanistan, as it did not exist back then. --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:52, 23 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ibn-Sina was Ethnically Persian[edit]

Kansas Bear has taken it upon himself to edit as far as I am aware of Rumi and Ibn-Sina's pages to remove MOS:Ethnicity, "Ethnicity, religion, or sexuality should generally not be in the lead unless relevant to the subject's notability".

This doesn't apply here, they're ethnically Persian figures, who worked in Persian, and were influenced by Persian.

Rumi is widely referred to as a Persian figure, see Rumi Talk page as well for consensus. Ibn-Sina is referred to as Persian in citation 23 and throughout the sources found on his page, as well as on Britannica.

Their ethnicities are as relevant to them as any Greek or Roman figure, who I consistently find are ethnically referred to in their lead paragraphs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:55DF:FC8A:8C6D:42C2:1616:4D24 (talk) 02:50, 5 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User Kansas Bear has edited more than 50 pages belonging to Persian and Iranian figures, removing the ethnicity. I took the labour to look at his contributions, and this "ethnicity removing" behaviour seems to be entirely concentrated on Iranian figures, never Arab figures like al-Kindi or Ibn Arabi or Averroes. I second this in saying that ethnicity should be mentioned in the lead section of this article as it is in Averroes' page and that of many other Islamic figures. It is completely ridiculous to have such a high protection status on a page just because one editor has requested it after his edits were reverted for obvious vandalism. شاه عباس (talk) 06:49, 16 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ethnicity is a fluid concept, especially in the ancient world, often pertaining simply to citizenship or language more than anything else, and far removed from the modern, more formalized conception of ethnicity. Ancient 'Persia' was a sweeping concept that expanded from the original Pars to encompass, conceptually, much of Central Asia. That isn't an ethnicity; that's a generalization. If we take Rumi, what he certainly was was a Persian poet, i.e. a native Persian-speaking poet most famous for his Persian works. What he identified as ethnically, in the modern sense of the word, is anyone's guess. Often individuals in that day and age do not really seem to have imagined themselves as ethnically anything; identifying more with their home town or province - in all likelihood, it wasn't much of a concern to them. The one big exception in the Muslim world, then and now, are those obsessed with demonstrating some connection back to the Quraysh of Mecca, for reasons of status. As for Avicenna, he wrote primarily in Arabic, so culturally he clearly straddled the Arabic-Persian divide far more evenly than the likes of Rumi, in the true Abbasid tradition. It would probably be most apt to simply make a point to this effect in the lead, stating that he produced works in both Arabic (predominantly) and Persian. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:12, 16 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We are not here concerned with self-identification or the notion of ethnicity as it operated in their heads (although, if you are interested, you can check out Ibn Khaldun's Muqaddimah where the function of ethnicity isn't that far fetched from what it is today in the MENA region). Of course, we are not here concerned with nation-states either. The problem here lies in selective scholarship and bias when it comes to Wikipedia articles, where Iranian figures are almost exclusively targeted. Avicenna's is the only page where "polymath" is given as a title without any sort of predicate, and for some reason it has the highest level of protection because one obviously biased user (whose edit history tells all) requested it. Not only is it ridiculous, it also goes against the previous consensus reached about this topic. شاه عباس (talk) 00:37, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If we look at gold-standard tertiary resources such as the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, they treat the material in exactly the same way, eschewing tangled debates about ethnicity in favor of his importance as a scholar in the Islamic world. Avoiding tangled debates is the reason for MOS:ETHNICITY. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:58, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It reads "Ethnicity, religion, or sexuality should generally not be in the lead unless relevant to the subject's notability. Similarly, neither previous nationalities nor the country of birth should be mentioned in the lead unless relevant to the subject's notability."
In Avicenna's case, both his Iranian ethnicity and his Islamic faith are relevant to his contributions to world-philosophy. These are the predicates of his scholarship in most sources. In the same manner that Aristotle is described as Greek and Averroes as an Arab Muslim when they are mention in modern scholarship.
Once again, it is very peculiar that this removal of ethnic identification applies overwhelmingly to Iranians on Wikipedia. Ibn Khaldun for instance is explicitly stated to be an Arab, and so is Averroes. شاه عباس (talk) 01:37, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please see WP:OTHER. Also, what is the problem with the ethnicity being removed from the lead, take a look at the body of the article, and you'll see that his ethnicity is mentioned. Best.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 01:52, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's not what that means. He's not notable for being any ethnicity; he is notable for being a great scholar of the middle ages/Islamic golden age. His origins are almost entirely irrelevant. Ethnicity shouldn't have been in the lead of the Averroes page either - I've removed it from there also now. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:55, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The lead section of the article on Averroes still contians a geographical signifier. It's absurd that the same not be the case for Avicenna. شاه عباس (talk) 13:46, 23 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's been identified that he lived under the Samanid Empire. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:08, 23 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The Samanid empire is not a geography, it's a political state. If we follow the precedent of the Averroes article (following Andulus rather than alMurwārīd), we should say that he was from Khurâsân/Greater Iran (whence he was from) or Iran (where he lived during the majority of his active scholarly years). شاه عباس (talk) 03:05, 24 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
All geographies are political defined by definition; they are just lines on maps. Al-Andalus was an Umayyad territory. The boundaries of the Samanid Empire at the time are relatively clear and specific to the subject. "Khorasan" is just a vague, shifting concept. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:17, 24 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not all geographies are restricted to political borders in any sense. Khurâsân and (Greater) Iran certainly aren't, being based on a shared cultural and historical heritage. Andalucia, furthermore, as a geographical concept, is not any less "vague" than Khurâsân. We use these categories based on conventions, without which everything is relative and it becomes impossible to communicate meaning based on a shared recognised reality. The same is the case here, if we hesitate to use "Khurâsân" or "Iran" where they are absolutely justified because they are historically relative, then when should we use them? I am happy for the article to only use "Muslim" as a predicate, and to only refer to Avicenna's geographical, rather than ethnic, origin. A vague statement on the courts wherein he was active is actually much more counterproductive than a simple reference to his geographic origin based on the conventional categories "Iran" and "Khurâsân", especially in a lead section that is supposed to be concise and straightforward. شاه عباس (talk) 10:02, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
He didn't actually come from Khorasan though, but the neighbouring Transoxiana (or Sogdia) - is that what you want to put? It's there in early life. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:35, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Furthermore, that he was in the "employ" of the Sâmânid empire is false information. The cited sources say that he was ethnically Persian and that his father was in the employ of the Sâmânids. Ibn Sīnâ himself was in the employ of Daylamite dynasties. شاه عباس (talk) 03:08, 24 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's a better point - though he did serve Nuh II of the Samanids, he soon moved on to serve the Ma'munids and later the Buyid dynasty, so a wide mix. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:26, 24 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Then remove Greek from the lead on Socrates, Arab from Khaldun, etc, etc.
You won't because the racism/reductionism towards Persians is evident on this site. 142.198.101.242 (talk) 21:30, 2 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ibn Sina was a Persian. This has also been mentioned by UNESCO.[1]Iroony (talk) 16:53, 29 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is clear anti-Iranian bias in many Iran-related pages on Wikipedia. The fact that the ethnicity of Avicenna, Khayyam and many others is removed from their lead paragraphs is a disheartening development that must be addressed by the admins. The fact that they are ethnically Persian is important given that they contributed to the survival of the Persian culture, language and identity. Without these people, Persian would have been another lost ethnicity/language, just like the dozens that were erased after the Islamic conquest. While the article does not need to open with a statement of their ethnicity, it can at least elaborate on it in the following line or paragraph in the introduction - 24.225.217.56 (talk) 23:58, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Regardless of whether he was Persian or Arab, the current text describing him in the Biography section is offensive, as it refers to “Persian stock.” “Stock”, as in “breeding stock”, is an inappropriate word for referring to humans under any circumstance and i request that this be changed to “heritage” or a similarly neutral word that does not relate to animals. Scihard (talk) 04:10, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Autobiography of Avicenna[edit]

First, Ibn Sina wrote an autobiography for his pupil named Abu Ubayd Al-Juzjani, which his student then completed with a concluding chapter. This autobiographical text was later included by Ibn Abi Ashaybi'ah in his work entitled 'Uyūn al-Anbā' fī Thabaqāt al-Athibbā' (Literary History of Medicine). This is the main source of Ibn Sina lifestory, especially for early childhood and education.

Second, Ibn Sina was born in 980 when Nuh ibn Mansyur was in power and the Samanid dynasty was facing war with the Karakhanids in the north and the Buyid dynasty in the south. Then, the Samanid empire was fall to Karakhanids in 999, and completely gone in 1004. No one mention this war in the background of Ibnu Sina's biography. Just for note, after the death of Nuh ibn Mansyur in 997, Ibn Sina fleed from Bukhara.

Lokamaya (talk) 21:53, 9 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 October 2023[edit]

Change ((lang-fa|ابن سینا)) to ((lang-ar|ابن سینا)) and add ((lang-fa|پور سینا)) after it. ― Ö S M A N  (talk · contribs) 06:03, 22 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

December 2023[edit]

@Premitive: MOS:FORLANG states that "If the subject of the article is closely associated with a non-English language, a single foreign language equivalent name may be included in the lead sentence". Obviously, there is no question that the subject was most closely associated with the Arabic language given that most of his works, including his famous ones (The Canon of Medicine, which wasn't translated into Persian until the 18th century, and The Book of Healing), were written in Arabic. M.Bitton (talk) 03:28, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Premitive: just in case you missed the first ping: could you please read my comment and provide a valid rationale for your revert? Thanks. M.Bitton (talk) 03:37, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not true, I answered these in my last edit summary:
The if part says nothing about what to do if there are two languages associated with a person. On the other hand the guideline clearly states that:
"Relevant foreign-language names, such as those of people who do not write their names in English, are encouraged. ... Separate languages should be divided by semicolons; romanizations of non-Latin scripts, by commas."
This rule is followed all around Wikipedia. You certainly know about it. It is strange that you insist on doing otherwise.
Why the guidelines talk about separating different foreign languages with semicolon? Because it allows them.
His native language was Persian. He wrote in Persian. Persian was official language where he was born and lived.
Now there are two WP:NPOV option: Move both to footnote, or Keep both in the first sentence. Keeping Arabic in the first sentence and removing Persian is a violation of WP:NPOV.
Premitive (talk) 03:53, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Besides we have a source already saying:
Premitive (talk) 04:05, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You certainly know about it. It is strange The only thing that is really strange is your assumption of bad faith.
This discussion is about his name and what the sources say about it (everything else is irrelevant):
  1. Avicenna is a Latin corruption of his Arabic patronym, which is well known and mentioned in his autobiography (which was written in Arabic). This fact is also covered in the article's body.
  2. The Persian equivalent that you added is a) not covered in the article and b) it looks undistinguishable from the Arabic patronym (which would suggest that this is a later transliteration).
Given that we're not supposed to include foreign equivalents in the lead sentence just to show etymology, I see no reason to keep it. NPOV, that you mentioned, only comes into play when there is a dispute between RS. M.Bitton (talk) 12:47, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You just said he has written more Arabic work and therefore Arabic should be the only one that we mention. Now that was all irrelevant? The guidelines are also irrelevant now? Nevertheless I added source for Persian name that you are trying to remove. But really I don't care if you remove the Persian name and its source (or perhaps it would be more reasonable for someone else to do it.) Any discussion with those who only want to remove a Persian name (shifting from one reason to another while doing so) is a waste time. Premitive (talk) 14:18, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That cherry picked source a) failed verification as it doesn't support the transliteration that you added and b) is at odds with what the reliable sources say about his name and what's covered in the article. It also makes no sense as "Ibn Sina" (son of Sina) is clearly Arabic. Do you have anything else or is that it? M.Bitton (talk) 14:23, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A source saying "Avicenna is a Latin rendering of a Hebraic translation of the Persian name Ibn Sina." fails verification? Now you want a Persian language source writing ابن سینا? I can bring a whole lot of that. But I'm sure that is not what you want. Tagging it as verification failed is childish; you are trying to make it look like it doesn't contain the said quote. So now it is about etymology? Sina is of Persian origin while ibn is of Arabic origin. But I thought it was not about etymology, right? "it is clearly Arabic" settles it (it hold for any source that I bring, Persian or not), why are we discussing it then? You know I can bring more sources but tagging the source that I just added as "verification failed" and "it is clearly Arabic" is telling. As I said just remove them, I won't revert. With this rate, within a few year, all Middle East and North Africa minorities (Persians, Berbers, etc.) will be removed from English Wikipedia. These days, English Wikipedia is not worthy of spending any time. (Assuming one is not paid, that is) Premitive (talk) 15:10, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please refrain from assuming bad faith.
Since I don't expect Persians to write in any other language, a Persian language source wouldn't prove anything (for the all reasons that I mentioned).
Who said anything about etymology? All I said is that Ibn Sina is a Arabic patronym (this is a fact). Do you disagree with it? M.Bitton (talk) 15:15, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Categories