Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:38, 10 April 2021

This article was the subject of an educational assignment in 2014 Q3. Further details were available on the "Education Program:Colgate University/CORE 151 I Legacies of the Ancient World (Fall 2014)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki.

Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting.

Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.

	Al-Farabi was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result July 21, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Biography: Science and Academia This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Mid-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Iran Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Turkey Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Iraq Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iraq, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Iraq on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IraqWikipedia:WikiProject IraqTemplate:WikiProject IraqIraq Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Syria Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Syria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Syria on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SyriaWikipedia:WikiProject SyriaTemplate:WikiProject SyriaSyria Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Islam: Muslim scholars Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Muslim scholars task force (assessed as Top-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Religion Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Philosophy: Philosophers / Social and political / Religion / Eastern / Medieval High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Misplaced Pages.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Philosophers Social and political philosophy Philosophy of religion Eastern philosophy Medieval philosophy Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Middle Ages Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Central Asia Mid‑importance Al-Farabi is part of WikiProject Central Asia, a project to improve all Central Asia-related articles. This includes but is not limited to Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Tibet, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Xinjiang and Central Asian portions of Iran, Pakistan and Russia, region-specific topics, and anything else related to Central Asia. If you would like to help improve this and other Central Asia-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.Central AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Central AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Central AsiaCentral Asia Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Politics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Template:Vital article

Untitled

Not persian, he was really turkish man. Simply, Farab was a Turkish region according to Ibn Ibn Hawkal.

Archives

Archive I*Archive II

You need to provide a reliable source to support your view.--Chewings72 (talk) 12:33, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Ethnicity section copied from the article

Origin

There exist a difference of opinion on the ethnic background of Farabi. According to D. Gutas: Ultimately pointless as the quest for Farabi’s ethnic origins might be, the fact remains that we do not have sufficient evidence to decide the matter.

My comment:

• The second source is not directly related to the statement. Sole Soul (talk) 14:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Response, it does says:"In the same way, the grandfather of Farabi, the famous scholar who is claimed to be both Turkish and Iranian, was called Tarkhan". Also provides valuable etymology. It is also a Turkish author that in my opinion is neutral in the sense that he states both theories.--RustamDastani (talk) 14:52, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

There is multiple sources that can back the difference, Britannica is one example. You can add the sentence ""In the same way, the grandfather ..." to the article. To avoid OR we should avoid any interpretations. Sole Soul (talk) 04:50, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I added 2 refs instead. Sole Soul (talk) 05:10, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I think that source is good nevertheless and shows a difference of opinion. If you read it carefully: "the famous scholar who is claimed to be both Turkish and Iranian". It is not speculating about his grandfather. Rather about Farabi, but mentions his grandfather had such a surname. --RustamDastani (talk) 16:13, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Iranic origin

Medieval Arab historian Ibn Abī Uṣaibiʿa (died in 1269), mentions in his ʿOyūn (final rescension in 1268) that al-Farabi's father was of Persian descent. Al-Shahrazūrī who lived around 1288 A.D. and has written an early biography also has stated that Farabi hailed from a Persian family. Additionally, Farabi has in a number of his works references and glosses in Persian and Sogdian(and even Greek but no Turkish),. Sogdian has been mentioned as his native language and the language of the inhabitants of Farab pointing to an Iranian-speaking Central Asian origin.. A Persian origin is also discussed by Peter J. King and other soruces as well as in a comprehensive source on Islamic Philosophy written in Arabic by the Egyptian scholar Prof. Hanna Fakhuri.

In this regard, Oxford professor C.E. Bosworth notes that "great figures as al-Farabi, al-Biruni, and ibn Sina have been attached by over enthusiastic Turkish scholars to their race".. D. Gutas has criticized Ibn Khallekān's statement, as it is only aimed to ridicule the earlier reports of Ibn Abī Uṣaibiʿa, and seems to have the purpose to document a Turkish origin for Farabi. In this context, he mentions that Ibn Khallekan was also the first to use the additional nisba (surname) "al-Turk" - a nisba Farabi never had.

Comments:

• "and the language of the inhabitants of Farab"

There is an omission, as the source says "Soghdian or maybe a Turkish dialect"

Response. It says: "Islamic world of that time, an area whose inhabitants must have spoken Soghdian or maybe a Turkish dialect". I think the must have is the strong statement. As a compromise, we can put an "an". But we should add the rest of the sentence in the reference or put the maybe in the other section. However must have mean certainty while maybe does not. --RustamDastani (talk) 14:58, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

• The criticism to to these primary sources is not emphasized as mentioned by Gutas.
• Only the criticism to Ibn Khallekan is mentioned, although Gutas criticized other sources. On Ibn Abī Oṣaybeʿa he said it "includes much legendary material" Sole Soul (talk) 15:12, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Comment, criticism of D. Gutas with regards to other sources should be mentioned in other places of the article as well. But he specifically criticizes Ibn Khalikan and states: "with the purpose of documenting a Turkish ethnic origin for Fārābī". So I agree, we should mention that both Ibn Khalikan and Ibn Abi Osaybea contain much legends (in the biography section when discussing the 12th/13th century sources). With regards to Ibn Khalikan he criticized for origin specifically. However, this we should mention after : "When major Arabic biographers decided to write comprehensive entries on Farabi in the 6th-7th/12th-13th centuries, there was very little specific information on hand; this allowed for their acceptance of invented stories about his life which range from benign extrapolation on the basis of some known details to tendentious reconstructions and legends" the sources (Ibn Khalikan, Ibn Abi OSaybe and etc.) contain much legends. --RustamDastani (talk) 15:19, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Comment 2: "It includes much legendary material, but Ebn Abī Oṣaybeʿa also quotes Fārābī where he can. Ebn Ḵallekān’s entry, by contrast, is a response to that of Ebn Abī Oṣaybeʿa: the latter had mentioned at the beginning of his entry, and for the first time by any extant biographer, that Fārābī’s father was of Persian descent; Ebn Ḵallekān’s entry is completely animated by the effort to prove that Fārābī was ethnically Turkish." I think we should mention that "for the first time by an extant biographer" --RustamDastani (talk) 15:34, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

• "Sogdian has been mentioned as his native language and the language of the inhabitants of Farab pointing to an Iranian-speaking Central Asian origin".

Cherry-picking: from source 8 that his native language is Sogdian (and leaving "Turkic dialect"

Source no. 10 has no info about publisher. The article only exists in Archive.org and Google documents. Any user can upload anything to both of these sites. I did not find anything about the author even in google web search. Sole Soul (talk) 01:31, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

• On Hanna Fakhuri. He did not endorse any ethnicity, he said : Ibn Abi Osayea narrated that his father was a Persian who married a Turkish woman." He also said that his city was Farab and he knew the Turkish language among others. Sole Soul (talk) 02:35, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Response: 1) On Hanna Fakhuri that is a specific Arabic source. Do you have it or have you seen it? While you are at it, do you know why Muhsin Mahdi has claimed? This article is referenced a lot: "M. Mahdi, “Al-Fārābī,” in C. C. Gillispie, ed., Dictionary of Scientific Biography IV, New York, 1971, pp. 523-26". He was also a Harvard university professor and Iraqi in origin.

Yes I have it and I think he is may be mistaken to state that Ibn Abi Osayea said his father married a Turkish woman because I looked at Ibn Abi Osayea book and did not find it. I do not understand your other question, which article? Sole Soul (talk) 22:53, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

2) On the Soghdian, there is no cherry picking since you can the same information to Turkic section. Also leaving out "Soghdian" as a Turkic dialect is correct. Soghdian is not a Turkic dialect. You can add Turkic dialect from the same source (without mentinoing Soghdian) in the other section. Also the other source you removed is a near complete translation of an article by the Iranian scholar mohammad javad mashkur (who is RS)(you can google book him under mashkoor or mashkur) with some additional commentary and that author wrote in Persian. Since Mashkur wrote in Persian, that article has the English version of some of his arguments. It could be a translation. I do not see any harm in having there.

However, there are two ways around this. We can: A) remove that whole sentence B) keep it. I do not see any harm in keeping these. But I do not see cherry picking but only a mistake by Paren in calling Soghdian a Turkic dialect. The fact is Farabi did have Soghdian words in his work, but Paren has made a mistake in calling a Turkic dialect. This is a hard situation, but a compromise would be to keep the sentence and use the same sources in the Turkic section that say "Turkic dialect" (without mentioning Soghdian) and the inhabitants "maybe spoke Turkish". This would be better usage of the sources than throwing it out. Also on the arguments of J. Mashkur which was translated in that archive source, I really do not see any harm in keeping it (since I believe Mashkur is RS). --RustamDastani (talk) 16:40, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

There is cherry picking, but I can live with your change. Sole Soul (talk) 22:53, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

• As I said in the edit summary Gutas sourced in the article from 2 different works. It is a possibility that a reader would assume that he is quoted from the same source. You don't think that a website is a RS, and I think Iranica is partisan. I don't think saying Britannica is biased in certain areas is a conspiracy theory, much less Iranica. Plus, Iranica is the most cited reference in the origin section. Sole Soul (talk) 23:10, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay fine. Aas I said, the stuff about Soghdian (the same sources) can be used in the other section. So that is fine in my opinion. On Iranica, ultimately you would be saying D. Gutas is biased. The editor E. Yarshater has absolutely no experience in Islamic philosophy and he didn't write any of that section. At most he would be checking for spelling. But the Cambridge Arabic history does reference Iranica article as others . For me, I have not seen a more detailed article than that of D. Gutas in Iranica. Maybe the article by Muhsin Mahdi could be it. Britannica seems to have no author. They can change their mind anytime. For example in 2009 they had Farabi as a Turkic scholar and now they say they do not know. Brittannica is not really a good source as no one knows who the author and editors for the article are. Anyhow, I am satisfied with the section and I kept your according to Encyclopedia Iranica. I think D. Gutas has shown three things that prove his point 1) the nisba. 2) the clothing "Turkish clothing" according to Ibn khalian as if someone 300 years later can figure out what clothes Farabi wore. 3) the attempt at trying to find etymology for some names.. I hope someone else expands the other section. --RustamDastani (talk) 23:29, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

The most important factor in determining a RS in Misplaced Pages is the publisher. That's why self-published works is generally unacceptable. The role of Iranica, its editors or any other effect is just speculations. Sole Soul (talk) 23:45, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

You are right. However, in my opinion there is no need to mention the source (as the user can click on it). However it is fine if you insist here. I hope someone improves the other section as well. But I am glad some work was done mutually to satisfy all parties currently involved. --RustamDastani (talk) 00:28, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Turkic origin

The oldest known reference to a possible Turkic origin is given by the medieval historian Ibn Khallekān (died in 1282), who in his work Wafayāt (completed in 669/1271) claimed that Farabi was born in the small village of Wasij near Farab (in what is today Otrar, Kazakhstan) of Turkic parents, and in the following decades and centuries. Other sources including the Oxford companion to philosophy have mentioned a Turkic origin.

Comment:

• Either we add "claimed" to all primary sources or remove it from them all. Sole Soul (talk) 01:44, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

1. ^ Cite error: The named reference Iranica was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
2. Bilge Umar, “The close affinity between the Iron Age Languages of Luvian Origin in Anatolia and the first Iranian languages – The possible connection between the name “Turk” and the Anatolian name “Tarkhun” (Ruler, Sovereign, Lord” in Cilingiroglu, David H. French, Anatolian Iron Ages: The Proceedings of the Second Anatolian Iron Ages Colloquium Held at İzmir, 4-8 May 1987, Published by Oxbow Books, 1991. excerpt: "As far it is understood, Tarkhan was a title but could have been used as a name as well. In the same way, the grandfather of Farabi, the famous scholar who is claimed to be both Turkish and Iranian, was called Tarkhan. It is clear the word Tarkhan was not pure Turkish and that it was adopted into Turkish from the old language of Soghdiana. This was proved in the Turkish dictionary Divan u Lugat it-Turk written by Kashgarli Mahmut (sic! Turkish way of saying Mahmud Kashghari) in the 11th century(1985: 436-471). ..Elbiruni says that Tarkhun was not a pure name. It was a title and had the same meaning as Tarkhan. It was however, in a different form. Welhausen (1902:270), who may be called a contemporary historian, also accepted this opinion. Here the most important view is that of Frye who agreed with the Russian scholar Smirnova (quoted by Frye op.cit). They say that the name written as Tarkhun and read as Tarkhan by the Arabic historians should be Turkhun of the local language of Sogdiana."
3. Ebn Abi Osaybea, Oyun al-anba fi tabaqat at-atebba, ed. A. Müller, Cairo, 1299/1882. و كان ابوه قائد جيش و هو فارسي
4. An Anthology of Philosophy in Persia, Vol. 1: From Zoroaster to ‘Umar Khayyam”, I.B. Tauris in association with The Institute of Ismaili Studies, 2007. Pg 134: “Ibn Nadim in his al-Fihrist, which is the first work to mention Farabi considers him to be of Persian origin, as does Mohammad Shahrazuri in his Tarikh al-hukama and Ibn Abi Usaybi'ah in his Tabaqat al-atibba. In contrast, Ibn Khallikan in his '"Wafayat al-'ayan considers him to beof Turkish descent. In any case, he was born in Farab in Khurasan of that day around 257/870 in a climate of Persianate culture"
5. Arabic: و كان من سلاله فارس in J. Mashkur, Farab and Farabi,Tehran,1972. See also Dehkhoda Dictionary under the entry Farabi for the same exact Arabic quote.
6. George Fadlo Hourani, Essays on Islamic Philosophy and Science, Suny press, 1975
7. Kiki Kennedy-Day, Books of Definition in Islamic Philosophy: The Limits of Words, Routledge, 2002, page 32
8. Joshua Parens (2006). An Islamic philosophy of virtuous religions : introducing Alfarabi. Albany, NY: State Univ. of New York Press. pp. 3. ISBN 0791466892 excerpt: "He was a native speaker of Turkic dialect, Soghdian".
9. Joep Lameer, "Al-Fārābī and Aristotelian syllogistics: Greek theory and Islamic practice", E.J. Brill, 1994. ISBN 9004098844 pg 22: "..in area whose inhabitants must have spoken Soghdian.."
10. G. Lohraspi, "Some remarks on Farabi's background"; a scholarly approach citing C.E. Bosworth, B. Lewis, R. Frye, D. Gutas, and others; PDF
11. P.J. King, "One Hundred Philosophers: the life and work of the world's greatest thinkers", chapter al-Fārābi, Zebra, 2006. pp 50: "Of Persian stock, al-Farabi (Alfarabius, AbuNaser) was born in Turkestan"
12. • Henry Thomas, Understanding the Great Philosophers, Doubleday,Published 1962
    • T. J. Denboer, "The History of Philosophy in Islam", BiblioBazaar, LLC, 2008. Excerpt page 98:"His father is said to have been a Persian General". ISBN 0554302535, 9780554302539
    ت، حـ، ديبور: تاريخ الفلسفة في الإسلام. ترجمة: محمد عبد الهادي أو ريدة. مطبعة لجنة التأليف والترجمة، القاهرة، ط4، 1957،ص 196
    • Sterling M. McMurrin, Religion, Reason, and Truth: Historical Essays in the Philosophy of Religion, University of Utah Press, 1982, ISBN 0874802032. page 40.
    • edited by Robert C. Solomon and Kathleen M. Higgins. (2003). From Africa to Zen : an invitation to world philosophy. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. pp. 163. ISBN 0742513505 "al-Farabi (870-950), a Persian,"
    • Thomas F. Glick. (1995). From Muslim fortress to Christian castle : social and cultural change in medieval Spain. Manchester: Manchester University Press. pp. 170. ISBN 0719033497 "It was thus that al-Farabi (c. 870-950), a Persian philosopher"
    • The World's Greatest Seers and Philosophers.. Gardners Books. 2005. pp. 41. ISBN 8122308244 "al-Farabi (also known as Abu al-Nasr al-Farabi) was born of Turkish parents in the small village of Wasij near Farab, Turkistan (now in Uzbekistan) in 870 AD. His parents were of Persian descent, but their ancestors had migrated to Turkistan."
    • Bryan Bunch with Alexander Hellemans. (2004). The history of science and technology : a browser's guide to the great discoveries, inventions, and the people who made them, from the dawn of time to today. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. pp. 108. ISBN 0618221239 "Persian scholar al-Farabi"
    • Olivier Roy, "The new Central Asia: the creation of nations ", I.B.Tauris, 2000. 1860642799. pg 167: "Kazakhistan also annexes for the purpose of bank notes Al Farabi (870-950), the Muslim philosopher who was born in the south of present-day Kazakhistan but who persumably spoke Persian, particularly because in that era there were no Kazakhs in the region"
    • Majid Khadduri; . The Islamic conception of justice. Baltimore : Johns Hopkins University Press, c1984.. pp. 84. ISBN 0801869749 "Nasr al-Farabi was born in Farab (a small town in Transoxiana) in 259/870 to a family of mixed parentage — the father, who married a Turkish woman, is said to have been of Persian and Turkish descent — but both professed the Shi'l heterodox faith. He spoke Persian and Turkish fluently and learned the Arabic language before he went to Baghdad.
13. Fākhūrī, Ḥannā., Tārīkh al-fikr al-falsafī ʻinda al-ʻArab, al-Duqqī, al-Jīzah : al-Sharikah al-Miṣrīyah al-ʻĀlamīyah lil-Nashr, Lūnjmān, 2002.
14. Clifford Edmund Bosworth, "Barbarian Incursions: The Coming of the Turks into the Islamic World." In Islamic Civilization, ed. by D.S. Richards. Oxford, 1973.
15. * edited by Ted Honderich. (1995). The Oxford companion to philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 269. ISBN 0198661320 "Of Turki origin, al-Farabi studied under Christian thinkers"
    • edited and translated by Norman Calder, Jawid Mojaddedi and Andrew Rippin. (2003). Classical Islam : a sourcebook of religious literature. New York: Routledge. pp. 170. ISBN 0415240328 "He was of Turkish origin, was born in Turkestan"
    • Ian Richard Netton. (1999). Al-Fārābī and his school. Richmond, Surrey: Curzon. ISBN 0700710647 "He appears to have been born into a military family of Turkish origin in the village of Wasil, Farab, in Turkestan"
    • Bassam Tibi. (2008). Political Islam, world politics, and Europe : democratic peace and Euro-Islam versus global jihad. London: Routledge. ISBN 0415437814 "In fact was by origin a Turk, but his cultural language was Arabic and his commitment was to his was to the Islamic civilization, not to his ethnicity"
    • Gulnara A. Bakieva. (2006). Social memory and contemporaneity. Washington, D.C.: Council for Research in Values and Philosophy. ISBN 1565182340 "Al-Farabi, a Turk by origin, born in Otrar, which was in the territory of modern Kazakhstan"
    • edited by Henrietta Moore. (1996). The future of anthropological knowledge. London: Routledge. ISBN 0415107865 "al-Farabi (873-950), a scholar of Turkish origin."
    • Diané Collinson and Robert Wilkinson. (1994). Thirty-Five Oriental Philosophers.. London: Routledge. ISBN 0203029356 "Al-Farabi is thought to be of Turkish origin. His family name suggests that he came from the vicinity of Farab in Transoxiana."
    • Fernand Braudel ; translated by Richard Mayne. (1995). A history of civilizations. New York, N.Y.: Penguin. ISBN 0140124896 "Al-Farabi, born in 870, was of Turkish origin. He lived in Aleppo and died in 950 in Damascus"
    • Jaroslav Krejčí ; assisted by Anna Krejčová. (1990). Before the European challenge : the great civilizations of Asia and the Middle East. Albany: State University of New York Press. pp. 140. ISBN 0791401685 "the Transoxanian Turk al-Farabi (d. circa 950)"
    • Hamid Naseem. (2001). Muslim philosophy science and mysticism. New Delhi: Sarup & Sons. pp. 78. ISBN 8176252301 "Al-Farabi, the first Turkish philosopher"
    • Clifford Sawhney. The World's Greatest Seers and Philosophers, 2005, p. 41
    • Zainal Abidin Ahmad. Negara utama (Madinatuʾl fadilah) Teori kenegaraan dari sardjana Islam al Farabi. 1964, p. 19
    • Haroon Khan Sherwani. Studies in Muslim Political Thought and Administration. 1945, p. 63
    • Ian Richard Netton. Al-Farabi and His School, 1999, p. 5

My comment: "Henrietta Moore", "Gulnara A. Bakieva", "Bassam Tibi", are not about philosophy or history. Qualifications of authors are unknown for most of the sources. Although they might meed WP:RS, it is good to carefully prune the sources for the top quality ones. --RustamDastani (talk) 14:51, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

removed. Sole Soul (talk) 15:53, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. But food for thought, do you think ""Henrietta Moore" has studied Ibn Khalikan, Ibn Abi Osaybea, Al-Shahrazūrī, Farab, Otrar, Arabic and etc.? How many of these authors have really delved in the issue? Of course these sources meet WP:RS in wikipedia.--RustamDastani (talk) 15:59, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

My believe is that nobody really know, so I have my issues with the so called "specialists" also, but we can only apply Misplaced Pages rules here. Sole Soul (talk) 01:47, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

A great quote from the Cambridge companion to Arabic philosophy: "These biographical facts are paltry in the extreme but we must resist the urge to embellish them with fanciful stories, as the medieval biographers did, or engage in idle speculation about al-Farabi’s ethnicity or religious affiliation on the basis of contrived interpretations of his works, as many modern scholars have done." Sole Soul (talk) 01:51, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I think that should be added and I have added it. Thanks. --RustamDastani (talk) 16:29, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Biography expanded

I have added many biographical items to the article as well. Specially his stay in Baghdad, Damascus and Egypt.--RustamDastani (talk) 00:32, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

These were from the certain details of his biography. There should also be a section on legendary biography as detailed by scholars like D. Gutas. For example Ibn Khalikan's claim that: "Later on, in his story about Fārābī at the court of Sayf-al-Dawla (see further below), he has Fārābī say that he knew more than seventy languages." --RustamDastani (talk) 00:32, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Should there be a section on his legendary biography? --RustamDastani (talk) 00:32, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

A thought

As you know Rustam, my first choice is a brief ethnicity section.

The factors that explains why a RS say he was Turkish, Persian or unknown are many, some of the them:

• Which primary source is used.
• His home city: Farab or Faryab.
• Any pro-Turkish or pro-Persian agenda some old or modern historians may have.

I can expand the Turkish section to make it like the Persian section by listing encyclopedias that said he was Turkish and the sources that said he was from Farab and at least one source which talk about pro-Persian bias.

I can, but I did not because that makes me part of the problem of ethnicity in Misplaced Pages. Nonetheless, expanding the Turkish section is the lesser evil than a completely unbalanced article. I may conduct RFC to ask for consensus. Sole Soul (talk) 01:38, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Response (please read carefully up to point 4 and feel free to read the rest): 1) Mentioning which primary source is used is important. That is why Ibn Khalikan, Ibn Abi OSaybea were brought. So not problem with your point one.

2) His home city has no bearing it, since: a) A good amount of the sources say he was a Persian/Iranian from Central Asia (starting with Ibn Osaybea and also 2ery sources). b) No author has said: "If Farabi was born in Farab, then he must have been Turkish". And no author has said: "If he was Persian, then he was not born in Farab". One cannot take a one line website article which does not make such a statement and make such an extrapolation(WP:OR), since that one line does not exhaust all the possibilities (which are mentioned in the Iranica article in details and again there is no exclusions) nor does it make statement if A was born in Farab, then he must have been Turkish. The third option: Being born in Farab and probably Persian is mentioned by other sources (Iranica) and there is no source that states: Farabi was born in Farab, then he is not Persian. Another fourth option is being born in Faryab in Khorasan and being Turkish. Another fifth option is migration of his parents to Farab who were Persian..and etc. A sixth option is to note that some sources uses Faryab for the Central Asia and Farab for Khorasan (Cambridge Compantion: "His familial origins are recorded as alternately in Farab, Khurasan or Faryab, Turkistan"). So simply, you cannot make any WP:OR.

Plus as you can see, I did not bring the fact that Parab/Paryab are Persian words into the Persian section. Obviously, it makes logical sense that if an area originally had a Persian name, then it was not Turkish speaking. That is exactly why Farab became Otrar (Turkish word) when the area was Turkified. This is mentioned by J. Mashkur that the area was Turkified later and its Persian name was changed to Turkish name, but I did not bring it to the section.

3) There is no source that uses the term "agenda". But if there is an agenda or bias that some old or modern historians may have, it must be exclusively restricted to Farabi in the sentence you are quoting and must not be a WP:fringe statement (author admitting that he is going against the "usual"). Else it is WP:synthesis, since one can find modern historians from any country with agenda or bias.

4) Listing the sources that say he was Turkish does not bother me. Any scholar looking for these sources will usually see one line and ultimately it goes back to Ibn Khalikan. I think the D. Gutas article covers it fairly well in detail and that is what a scholar would look at.

Now about things I did not mention:

5) I have made that section as brief as possible. For example, if I wanted to do extrapolation:

Note also I did not mention many things like: "C.E. Bosworth, "The Appearance of the Arabs in Central Asia under the Umayyads and the establishment of Islam", in History of Civilizations of Central Asia, Vol. IV: The Age of Achievement: AD 750 to the End of the Fifteenth Century, Part One: The Historical, Social and Economic Setting, edited by M. S. Asimov and C. E. Bosworth. Multiple History Series. Paris: UNESCO Publishing, 1998. excerpt from page 23: "Central Asia in the early seventh century, was ethnically, still largely an Iranian land whose people used various Middle Iranian languages."

Which fits fell with Soghdian theory.

Or the fact that Ibn Sina, Farabi's best student says: "Since some men have to serve others, such people must be forced to serve the people of the just city. The same applies to people not very capable of acquiring virtue. For these are slaves by nature as, for example, the Turks and Zinjis and in general those who do not grow up in noble climes where the condition for the most part are such that nations of good temperament, innate intelligence and sound minds thrive”(Chris Brown, Terry Nardin, Nicholas J. Rengger, “International Relations in Political Thought: Texts from the Ancient Greeks to the First World War”, Published by Cambridge University Press, 2002, pg 156-157).". Note according to J. Mashkur, the "just city" (Arabic Midanat al-Fadila) is a term Ibn Sina took directly from Farabi and he would not make such a statement knowing that Ibn Sina was from Central Asia and was the person tha expanded on Farabi's work and probably had the best familiarity with his background (they were one generation apart or so) and had Farabi been a Turk, Ibn Sina who was a closest student would not make such a statement. Now how could Avicenna who was his biggest student make such a statement about Farabi lacking "good temperament, innate intelligence and sound mind"?

Or the fact that Farabi is the earliest example of someone using Soghdian (Iranian alphabet) in Arabic alaphabets and devising letters for sounds in Soghdian that do not exist in Arabic, Persian or Turkish.

So as you can see, there was much more other stuff I can write. However, feel free to expand the Turkish section (about the same length since as you can see there are more), but keep in mind points 1,2,3. Also I do not see anything evil here. I think it is great that classical sources are mentioned.--RustamDastani (talk) 13:03, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I was not arguing whether he was Turkish or Persian. I talked in good faith but clearly that is not working . I will stop these discussions. Sole Soul (talk) 13:40, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I am assuming good faith although I do think your criticsm of D. Gutas is a slightly off. I just wanted to mention 1,2,3 and say that there are other arguments. I just basically summarized the Iranian origin section. You can do the same for the Turkish origin section if you wish, but please remember points 1,2,3 above which I mentioned some[REDACTED] rules about possible WP:OR (extrapolation from a sentence) and WP:synthesis. Thanks. --RustamDastani (talk) 13:52, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry, if I add anything I will use near the exact words as the RS, not more. Sole Soul (talk) 13:55, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. There were other arguments I did not mention , so that the main issue can be about Farabi and his works rather than the silly back and forth. However it is good to have this summary since classical sources differ. Since the issue is inconsequential as far as his work (except possibly his work on music). I have no problem with putting a similar size paragraph in the other section. I just had a problem with extrapolation(WP:OR (point 2)) or synthesis (point 3). --RustamDastani (talk) 14:15, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

So I looked up the list of Turkish scholars/scientists and came up with 1-2 names from middle ages and even those like taqi muhammad ibn ma'ruf is contested between arabs and turks...all the rest are from contemporary times...when will you turks acknowledge that your history is not founded on the pen but the sword —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.80.113.143 (talk) 06:24, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

observation

So I looked up wikipedia's list of Turkish scholars/scientists and came up with 1-2 names from middle ages and even those like taqi muhammad ibn ma'ruf is contested between arabs and turks because of the ambiguities surrounding their nationalities...all the rest are from contemporary times...when will the turks acknowledge that their history doesn't start with the pen but the sword..

Next time do us a favor, keep your "observation" to yourself, would you?Torebay (talk) 10:23, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Torebay, dont worry about him, he is a loser with no history .he is jelous becuase his country is fake. dont feed losers

Is it really fake? Or is this Turkish UNESCO site claiming Ibn Sina was a Turk FAKE?

http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CI/CI/pdf/mow/nomination_forms/turkey_works_ibn_sina_suleymaniye_manuscript_library.pdf 'Though there is no dispute about where Ibn Sina was born or died, his origin is open to discussion. Yet according to his own words in his famous “Al-Qanun Fi’l Tıbb” (Vol:2) it will not be a far-fetched assumption to accept him as a Turk. Ibn Sina, the eminent scientist, philosopher, pharmacologist, theorist, poet and successful politician of Turkish origin is mostly known as a clinician under his Latin name “Avicenna”.' BY Prof. Dr. Berin U. YURDADOĞ Prof.Dr. Nilüfer TUNCER Prof.Dr. İrfan ÇAKIN

LOL...please find me an Iranian cultural website claiming another country's heritage figure. Iranian scholars have integrity and therefore don't sacrifice their academic honesty and integrity for cheap national-political ends. Besides, the list of Persian scholars, scientists, and poets is too long for them to try to steal or claim others as their own. And when will the TURKS admit to the Armenian genocide? Folks are still in denial

Al-Farabi was a SUNNI, not a Shia

Al-Farabi was clearly a Sunni, as this is a historical fact, and evident throughout his works. Please change this misleading information! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.147.248.2 (talk) 12:54, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Rather than go through all the sources, can you point out two or three that are cited in the article that support the claim? —C.Fred (talk) 14:26, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

This article contains a fallacious fabrication. Al-Farabi is a well known Sunni. He did not belong to the "twelver" maddhab! This is a lie —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.109.3.15 (talk) 16:11, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Hrm. The link provided is to the Ahlul Bayt Digital Islamic Library Project, which states its "objectives are to digitize and present on the Internet quality Islamic resources, related to the history, law, practice, and society of the Islamic religion and the Muslim peoples, with particular emphasis on Twelver Shia Islamic school of thought." They claim he's Sunni. By contrast, the History of Islamic Philosophy claims he's Shi'a, per the citations made in the article. That work isn't online, so I can't readily validate it. However, it seems we have two contradicting sources here. —C.Fred (talk) 17:56, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

The only scholarly sources I can find that mention this, all come down on the side of al-Fārābī being a Shīʿite:

• Netton, Ian Richard (1992). Al-Fārābī and his School. Richmond: Curzon. p. 4. ISBN 0-7007-1064-7.
• Najjar, Fauzi M. (1961). "Fārābī's Political Philosophy and Shī'ism". Studia Islamica (14): 57–72 . ISSN 0585-5292.

I will edit the article accordingly.

All the best. –Syncategoremata (talk) 15:30, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

On a more thorough check, I was patently too quick here. The scholarly opinion is divided between his being Shīʿite and the contrary position that he probably wasn't (but without suggesting that he was a Sunni either).

• A good range of references are given in Crone, Patricia (2005). Medieval Islamic Political Thought. Edinburgh University Press. p. 182 n79. ISBN 9780748621941.
• An extensive discussion (contra Walzer in particular) is given in section 4 of Mahdi, Muhsin (December 1990). "Review: Al-Fārābī's Imperfect State". Journal of the American Oriental Society. 110 (4): 691–726. ISSN 0003-0279.

I still cannot find any evidence in the literature for his being Sunni apart from the one comment in www.al-islam.org, but I have no idea of the reliability of that source. For the moment, I've changed the article back to the neutral Muslim, as per an earlier edit. He is still listed in various places here as Shīʿite, which should be sorted out too at some point.

All the best. –Syncategoremata (talk) 17:34, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

A simple question

Can I ask a simple question? Is there ANY evidence at all that al Farabi was a Muslim. The evidence suggests that his beliefs were strongly Neo-Platonist with a significant leaning to Aristotelian modifications of Platonism. What evidence is there that he had any Muslim beliefs on top of all that. I welcome enlightenment on this point, but please, quotations from his texts only. I don't need religious rants, just facts. Apart from being born into a Muslim culture, was he himself a Muslim? Eluard (talk) 06:52, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Block

Can someone ban or block the user who posted 'Persian's Historical Theft' (user: 217.146.218.193 )

He seems to be making changes to Persian/Iranian related articles, and after reading his rant —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.80.113.143 (talk • contribs) 23:20, April 28, 2010 (UTC)

Are you joking? Do you know what a "glass house" is? How about not answering an unruly disruptor with cheap shots. GnarlyLikeWhoa (talk) 15:40, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

how about we block all iranian vandals who try to steal turkic peoples history. even some of you tried to change ottoman empire to an iranian empire on wikipedia! only vandals do this kind of things .please try to be more mature instead of changing everyting turkic to iranian .its getting old —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.24.202.185 (talk) 10:06, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Religion v. Nationality

Many here need the reminder that there is a difference between religious affiliation and nationality, therefore debates ought to be separate. In this case Al-Farabi was a Persian Muslim, just as President Kennedy was an Irish-American Catholic. GnarlyLikeWhoa (talk) 15:42, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

you do not have any sources to prove that he was persian, please stop copy pasting every turkic hero,writer or artist . i know that iranians are not very famous in the west but stealing other peoples history should be a shameful action. please stop showing turkic people as iranian or persian. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.24.202.185 (talk) 09:59, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Fârâbî

in Turkish Böri (talk) 11:21, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

farab,- town/area in kurdistan

According to Dr. A. Ravitsky at Hebrew University. Im just geeving his words, not concluding anything.

Sogdian or Turkish ?what?

Sogdian is an Iranian language not turkish !!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.169.49.233 (talk) 04:55, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

He was a turkic philosoph.it is fact Turano'g'lu (talk) 12:31, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

He was an Iranic philosopher, Farab is a Persian word, and Arab historians who studied his works confirmed that he was born to Persian parents. turk nationalists seem like they want to claim every scientist under the sun as "turkic", maybe because you have none of your own :D — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:5AC0:61:88F7:53D3:E734:C54A (talk) 19:41, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

What is the difference between Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan and Transoxiana

The article itself says Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan although the infobox for some reason only says Turkmenistan. When were these the same place? And the source I saw, Henry Corbin, says "Abu Nasr Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn Tarkhan ibn Uzalagh al-Farabi was born at Wasij, near Farab in Transoxiana". If the sources disagree, we must make that clear. Dougweller (talk) 18:05, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

I generally agree that perhaps both Turkmenistan (from the BEA) and Kazakhstan (assuming we're sure about it) should be mentioned. I have also seen "Turkish Transoxiana" being linked to Farabi, and "Turkistan" mentioned in some of the early biographical dictionaries (like Ẓahīr al-dīn al-Bayhaqī's Tatimmat ṣiwān al-ḥikma). Wiqi 18:20, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

The terms Turkmenistan, Kazakhistan, Uzbekistan and so on were created in 1924 and have no historical value, so they are anachronism terms and could not be used here.--93.56.179.136 (talk) 01:03, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Turkmenistan was used by the cited source. In any case, I have opted to use the version used by Bayhaqi (Turkestan) and Ibn Nadim (Faryab in Khorasan). Incidentally, at least in the version of his book found on-line, Ibn Nadim does not mention anything about his Persian ancestry (contrary to what this article claims). Wiqi 03:44, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

The most academically-accepted terminology for the region at the time, is Persia or Transoxiana if you want to be precise. Modern borders and region names are irrelevant. Kurdo777 (talk) 04:26, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Using the wording of reliable sources (most of which agree that he was born in predominantly Turkish regions, regardless of his ethnicity) should be preferred. Also, the primary/secondary sources do not just say Transoxiana/Khorasan, but actually give more details and name places, like Turkestan. The secondary sources also use these more precise terms. We should be more precise and try to reflect the wording/tone used in the cited sources. There is no point in trying to hide that information. Wiqi 05:00, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Or better yet, just leave it the birthplace as Farab without any other labels, either linking it to ] or the section that discusses the dispute about where he was actually born, which Farab that is, in order to avoid similar silly disputes. Kurdo777 (talk) 05:02, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

It still seems there is disagreement in the sources used. Precise terms or otherwise. Which brings things back to Dougweller's comment at the top of this section. Best, ROBERTMFROMLI | /_CN 05:06, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Kurdo, the only sources we have, and they were well-cited here, are Bayhaqi (Farab, Turkestan) and Ibn Nadim (Faryab, Khorasan). So which primary source mentioned that he was born in Farab, Iran? Wiqi 05:15, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Turkic vs Turkish

Our sources say Turkish, thus the article needs to say Turkish. Our article on Turkic peoples says "The term Turkic represents a broad ethno-linguistic group of people including existing societies such as the Turkish, Azerbaijani, Chuvashes, Kazakhs, Tatars, Kyrgyzs, Turkmen, Uyghur, Uzbeks, Bashkirs, Qashqai, Gagauzs, Yakuts, Crimean Karaites, Krymchaks, Karakalpaks, Karachays, Nogais and as well as past civilizations such as the Kumans, Kipchaks, Avars, Bulgars, Turgeshes, Seljuks, Khazars, Ottoman Turks, Mamluks, Timurids, and possibly the Xiongnu and Huns", and that is not what our sources are suggesting, they are specifically saying Turkish. I don't understand why editors use a word not used in our sources although this appears on the fact of it to be some sort of nationalist thing to avoid using the word Turkish. It may not be that but that is what it looks like to an outsider. Dougweller (talk) 05:31, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

I agree. Thanks for noticing this. Even in other matters it seems that the Turkish section misrepresents what the sources are saying. For instance, Bosworth was writing about modern Turkish nationalists, not Ibn Khallikan. And Gutas nowhere criticized Ibn Khallikan, he merely noted that Ibn Khallikan intended to refute the claim that Farabi was Persian -- that is not a criticism. The section also misses the views of Abu al-Fida'. Wiqi 06:40, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Actually, Gutas is saying Ibn Khallikan was keen on proving "a Turkish ethnic origin" and to "this end", he mde a fabrication, changing the name/title "Al-Turki" to a descriptive statement "he was a Turk". Gutas calls Ibn Khallikan's work " completely animated by the effort to prove that Fārābī was ethnically Turkish". If that's not criticism, I'm not sure what is. So there is no misinterpretation here. Pease don't change the wording without a clear WP:CON here first. Kurdo777 (talk) 13:46, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Could you explain why you changed 'Turkish' to 'Turkic' - it doesn't appear that the sources use the word Turkic, and you don't seem to have consensus for that change in any case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougweller (talk • contribs) 14:19, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Doug, are you addressing me? I did not change "Turkish" to "Turkic", I kept all your changes. So I'm not sure what you mean. I'm actually all for getting consensus for such contested changes. Kurdo777 (talk) 00:18, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

First, do you have any secondary sources which claim that Gutas (and "others", as the current paragraph claims) "criticized" Ibn Khallikan? If you don't, then there is no point in imposing your own original research on what Gutas has said. Instead, we should try to report the views of Gutas without using loaded words, like "criticized", and let the readers decide whether it was a criticism or not. Second, you claim that Gutas was one of "others" who also criticized Ibn Khallikan. You'll need to cite sources for those "others", otherwise it is just Gutas. Third, you have also removed the views of Ibn al-Fida' without giving any reason for doing so. Fourth, Bosworth was talking about modern Turkish nationalists. This meaning is not being made clear in a paragraph about historical reports. Should I go ahead and make these changes? Wiqi 00:55, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Kurdo, thanks for your post to my talk page, but you did change 'Turkish' to 'Turkic' with phttp://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Al-Farabi&action=historysubmit&diff=457968841&oldid=457934109 this edit]. Dougweller (talk) 06:35, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh I see that now. That appears to have an error, as a result of copy/paste job gone wrong. Otherwise, not only I did not intent to change Turkish to Turkic, I actually tried to save those Turkic-oo-Turkish changes you had made, and I did do that for both the headers and two other usages in the same paragraph, but I accidentally missed this one. Sorry about that. Kurdo777 (talk) 23:05, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem, these things happen, I just couldn't figure out why at the time because there were no other similar changes. Dougweller (talk) 06:16, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Ibn Nadim and Persian ancestry

Wiqi55 has placed two n-line dubious tags in front of two quoted verifiable statements supported by academic secondary sources, requesting a quote from the primary source in another language, that the academic secondary sources are quoting. This is an outright abuse of dubious tags, as our job as Wikipedias, is not to question secondary sources and request quotes from primary sources instead. This is also borderline WP:OR, as secondary sources are more acceptable in Misplaced Pages than primary sources anyways, and in this case we have a verifiable quote from a secondary source, being questioned by Wiqi55, based on his own original research. Wiqi55 is in no position to question the research of an academic, and a reliable secondary source and claim that he "didn't find the quote" in the primary source, as if his findings/research or lack thereof, have any bearing on the verifiability or the reliability of the secondary source. This is not how Misplaced Pages works and that's not what the dubious tag is intended for. Kurdo777 (talk) 03:55, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Examining primary sources in a descriptive manner is not considered original research (see WP:PRIMARY). I'm aware that some reliable sources sometimes make mistakes. I'm not sure whether that is true or not in this case, but I thought the issue needs to be discussed. This will eventually help us to determine whether such sources are reliable/specialist or not. If you can find the quote in question, please post it. Wiqi 04:28, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I've reverted these as an inappropriate use of the tags. I've been this before, an editor saying that we have to verify what appear to be reliable sources before we can use them. Wiqi, take these to WP:RSN and see if people agree with you there. Dougweller (talk) 06:39, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

The RSN is not useful here as this is about a claim made by a source, not necessarily the source itself. The documentation of {{Dubious}} explains why adding this template was appropriate. Start reading from "The purposes of this template are ..." Wiqi 07:34, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Iranica is a reliable source. Unless you have consensus here that these sources are not reliable, you'll need to appeal elsewhere. This is an RSN issue, what else could it be? Dougweller (talk) 07:56, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

The claim under discussion is not made by Iranica. It is cited here based on a book published by "I.B. Tauris in association with The Institute of Ismaili Studies". Doesn't seem very reliable to me. But I'm not questioning the source, as other sources (primary or secondary) might have made the same claim. This is exactly why we have {{Dubious}}, to ask for more sources. Wiqi 08:20, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

The first template you added to a statement that you yourself added, "Ibn al-Nadim in his Fihrist, and" - I don't understand why you added that and then added a template, but in any case I've reverted it as it would need a source. I'll get back to the other one in a minute but first I want to fix something else that got messed up a while back. Dougweller (talk) 09:50, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Didn't need fixing after all. Sorry about my confusion over Iranica. I.B. Tauris looks like a reliable publisher and Institute of Ismaili Studies seems to be a reliable institution from looking at the article and the relationships of the Institute. So I can see no reason not to believe that the book meets our criteria as a reliable source. Dougweller (talk) 09:59, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

No, it wasn't me who added that sentence. Regardless of the quality of the source, the claim is still an exceptional claim, not even mentioned in the Iranica article which had an extensive discussion of his ethnicity (and Ibn al-Nadim is more famous than some the names discussed by Iranica). Exceptional claims should be discussed and sourced properly. I'm not sure why do you find that objectionable. Wiqi 12:17, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

It looks very much as though you did add it, see . I still think this is a matter for RSN, you are arguing that it is not a reliable source. Dougweller (talk) 12:48, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I was undoing a blanket revert. The intermediate diff that added that sentence can be found here . Also, the documentation of {{Dubious}} is clear and inline with my usage (i.e., asking for more sources). Otherwise, why do you think we have the {{Dubious}} template? Wiqi 17:17, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Ah, sorry, Wikiblame just showed you adding it. I will say that I think a lot of editors don't agree with the essay you cited, WP:DRNC, which is probably why it never became a guideline. As for the template, it's one of those that has seemed pretty pointless to me unless used on an inactive article with an inactive talk page by someone who is pretty sure it needs work but doesn't have the time or whatever to do it. In this case it's served any purpose it might have here, warned/alerted editors, and it is now time to take it to RSN if you don't think it's accurate or a reliable source. Dougweller (talk) 18:39, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm currently looking at the other sources we have here and none of them mention the Persian claim made by Ibn al-Nadim (although I'm not done yet). If no other source supports this claim and other editors are not willing to concede that it was just an error, then I'd guess we will eventually end up at the RSN. Wiqi 23:03, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

hes persian

most historians agree that he is persian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.1.244.61 (talk) 02:57, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Farabi's Persian origin

"Ibn Nadim in his al-fihrist, which is the first work to mention Frabi considers him to be of Persian origin, as does Muhammad Shahrazuri in his Ta'rikh al-hukama and Ibn Abi Usaybi'ah in his Tabaqat al-atibba. In contrast, Ibn Khallikan in his Wafayat al-a yan considers him to be of Turkish descent." p.134

S.H.Nasr (2008) An Anthology of Philosophy in Persia vol 1: from zoroaster to umar khayyam New York. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.68.252 (talk) 04:31, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Al-Farabi's was of Turkic origin

Everyone knows that al-Farabi's origin is Turkic

Clearly not, otherwise why would you need to make the point that he is Turkic?

in the book ārā ahl al-madīna al-fāḍila ("al-Farabi on the Perfect State")(Richard Walzer (1985), Al-Farabi on the Perfect State, Page 3)Richard Walzer thus writes:

Abu Nasr Muhammad b. Muhammad b. Tarkhan b. Awzalugh (Uzlugh) al-Farabi was born about A.D. 870 in Turkestan, at Wasij in the district of Fārāb on the Jaxartes. He eventually settled down and spent many years in Baghdad, the seat of the 'Abbasid caliphs. During part of the last ten years of his life he stayed at the court of Sayf al-Dawla, the renowned Hamdanid Amir of Aleppo, whose active symphathies for the Imami variant of the contemporary Shia are well know. He is reported to have died in A.D. 950.

It is agreed that al-Farabi was of Turkic origin. He's father was a qa'id, perhaps not a very high ranking soldier of fortune, who may somehow have belonged to the mercenaries recruited in increasing numbers by the 'Abbasid caliphs just a generation before al-Farabi was born. What was thought about Turks in educated Baghdad society about the middle of the ninth Christian century can be referred from that great Mu'tazilite Arabic prose writer al-Jahiz in his Epistle on the Excellence of the Turks, written for al-Fath b. Khaqan, the Turkish general of the Caliph al-Mutawakkil. The position of the Turks in ninth-century Baghdad as such is irrelevant in the present context; it is enough to pint out that while the Turish soldiers were widely disliked and unpopular, there was no anti-Turkish feeling in a more general sense. A young man of Turkish descent who was not given to soldiering might find it hard to advance in society because he had to start from an unfavourably low social background, but his being a Muslim of Turkish race did not constitute an insuperable obstacle.

al-Farabi's work shows no trace or reminder of his Turkish origin; an influence of Turkish idioms on his style has been rashly suggested by outsiders who are unaware of the special conditions of Islamic life in al-Farabi's day and of the unique position of the Arabic language, both in the formative centuries of Islam and a very long time after. A few Persian, Greek and Sogdian glosses are extant in the writings which have recently been printed - no Turkish gloss has turned up as yet. al-Farabi has none of the racial superiority of the Arabs; he dislikes and disapproves of tribal arrogance in others(see Chapter 18, &8), and certainly betrays none himself. If asked, he would have replied that the only safe and permanent social bond is provided by a religion, as are Judaism and Hiduism-preferably understod in the way of philosophy (cf. Chapter 17).

Abu Nasr Muhammad b. Muhammad b. Tarkhan b. Awzalugh (Uzlugh) al-Farabi was born about A.D. 870 in Turkestan, at Wasij in the district of Fārāb on the Jaxartes (Ibn Abi Usaybia, ii, pp.134 ff. al-Qifti) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Majilis (talk • contribs) 08:02, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Please kindly read the whole page above, before making any changes! In fact 08:34, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, i read, however i ask you don't ignore the facts, it's all known, have respect for others please

Majilis fact 01:05, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

You are ignoring the fact that this article contains references for both Persian and Turkish. You have not shown anything that changes what is stated in the article. You are simply edit-warring. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:23, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

The fact concerned here is not about the references but the place of his origin, everyone at least in Central Asia knows that he is of Central Asian Scholar of Islamic faith, his place of birth, and all the relevant information regarding him and there is still more to approve it, i just wonder why you ignoring very truth and the well-known facts? (talk) 17:23, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Dimitri Gutas among others have argued that Farabi has made a number of references in Persian and Sogdian but not Turkish. Apparently these scholars are not people since according to you 'everyone' i.e., the entire human race except for these academics, 'knows that Farabi was what you claim him to be (incidentally, he is of the same ethnicity as you I presume?)

Remove Dimitri Gutas

I have noticed this obscure name "Dimitri Gutas" in many articles relating to the great philosophers of Islam such as Ibn Sina and Al-Farabi. This person is an ordinary teacher/professor/debater whose ideas are too trivial and unimportant to be added in Misplaced Pages articles. Even if not agreed so, there are no citations provided on his words, which in turn degrades and undermines the quality and authenticity of these articles. The person "Dimitri Gutas" is neither a well-known philosopher nor a thinker. In fact, he is very little known. Even Misplaced Pages does not know this so-called "Dimitri Gutas" and the link that refers to his name does not exist and is broken (Check the link for yourselves). As Misplaced Pages itself says, "Misplaced Pages does not have an article with this exact name."

Therefore, it is for the sake of the factual data and correctness of these articles, to remove ASAP the uncited name and data regarding "Dimitri Gutas" from this and other articles, in order to achieve a more accurate article regarding these great philosophers and stop misleading/misinforming of the worldly public. Otherwise, this article is utterly defective and misleading at this point and is therefore against the term of Misplaced Pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by InnamoraTi (talk • contribs) 19:26, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

From our German article about this Yale professor:

Dimitri Gutas (* 1945 ) is an American Arabist and Hellenist Greek origin, and professor of Arabic and Arabic reception of Greek texts in the Department of Near Eastern Languages ​​and Civilizations of Yale University , USA .

Gutas studied classical philology , religion, history , Arabic and Islamic studies at Yale University, where he in 1974 for Ph.D. received his doctorate.

His main research interests are the classical Arabic and the intellectual tradition of the Middle Ages in the Islamic culture, especially Avicenna , and the Graeco-Arabica , which is the reception and the tradition of Greek works on medicine , science and philosophy in the Arab-Islamic world (especially from the 8th to the 10th century in Baghdad ). In this special field, he is considered one of the leading experts and is at the editorial project by William W. Fortenbaugh and Robert W. Sharples to the ancient Greek philosopher Theophrastus , and participated together with Gerhard Endress editor of the Greek and Arabic Lexicon . Gutas currently working on a book of translations from the Greek, Syriac, Arabic, Hebrew and Latin from the Hellenistic period to the Renaissance.

Gutas is a member of the scientific advisory board of numerous journals, including the leading journal Arabic Sciences and Philosophy (Cambridge University Press) and co-editor and contributors to the revision of the Ueberweg , a comprehensive history of philosophy, which will now include four volumes of Arabic philosophy.

Looks like he is an expert in his field and should have an article here. Dougweller (talk) 05:07, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Created his article. See also the book Islamic philosophy, science, culture, and religion; studies in honor of Dimitri Gutas - academics don't edit books in honor of non-notable academics. Dougweller (talk) 08:29, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Name in the lead

al-Farabi's name (Template:Lang-ar / Abū Naṣr Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad Fārābī) is Arabic and should be mentioned as such in the lead. I see no reason why it should be mentioned as Persian, because it was not Persian, Farabi was not (an ethnic) Persian, nor did he write in Persian. He had some knowledge of Persian which he had aquired in the learning centers of Khorasan and Iraq. He spent almost all of his life in Arabic Iraq, all of his works are in Arabic and he relied mostly on Arabic translations of Greek works. It will also neutralize this silly fight between Persian and Turkish nationalists, trying to "Persianize" or "Turkicize" a philosopher who lived more than 1000 years ago and was almost certainly of Iranian Sogdian origin - a people with a unique culture, identity, language, and script living in between the Perso-Arabic world and the Turkic nomadic confederations. --Lysozym (talk) 12:16, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Al Farabi and Aristotle. Importance of Zimmermann's translation of Al-Farabi's Commentary and Short Treatise on Aristotle's de Interpretatione

−(84.100.243.163 (talk) 07:04, 22 December 2012 (UTC)) Even though the IP is probably the author of this as he has identified himself elsewhere on Misplaced Pages, this is still a copyright violation and I've removed it. Dougweller (talk) 10:39, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

copyright vio

Most of the stuff citing "Iranica" is cut and pasted it needs to be summarized in an editors own words J8079s (talk) 04:56, 10 September 2014 (UTC) Tagged the page all that I checked was cut and paste. from;<ref name="Iranica">{{cite web |first=Dimitri |last=Gutas |title=Farabi |work=Encyclopædia Iranica |accessdate= April 4, 2010 |url= http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/farabi-i }}J8079s (talk) 04:01, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Al-Farabi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160307121111/http://www.trincoll.edu/depts/phil/philo/phils/muslim/farabi.html to http://www.trincoll.edu/depts/phil/philo/phils/muslim/farabi.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070325171417/http://umcc.ais.org/~maftab/ip/hmp/XXIII-TwentyThree.pdf to http://umcc.ais.org/~maftab/ip/hmp/XXIII-TwentyThree.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160307121111/http://www.trincoll.edu/depts/phil/philo/phils/muslim/farabi.html to http://www.trincoll.edu/depts/phil/philo/phils/muslim/farabi.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:33, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Al-Farabi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.iranica.com/newsite/index.isc?Article=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.iranica.com%2Fnewsite%2Farticles%2Funicode%2Fv9f4%2Fv9f410.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111003184408/http://www.loghatnaameh.com/dehkhodaworddetail-f1f713a319da41dc97d398057889ff2f-fa.html to http://www.loghatnaameh.com/dehkhodaworddetail-f1f713a319da41dc97d398057889ff2f-fa.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:29, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

"To use Maimonides’ words, if Aristotle is the First Master the second one is undoubtedly Farabi"

This comment isn't sourced. I have been unable to find any reliable source for this in any of Maimonides' writings. He does write very complimentary things about Al Farabi. But not this.

For example he writes "ובכלל אומר לך, לא תתעסק בספרי מלאכת ההיגיון אלא במה שחיבר החכם אבונצ"ר אלפראכ"י לבדו, כי כל מה שחיבר בכלל, ובפרט ספר ההתחלות הנמצאות שלו, הכל סולת נקיה, ויתכן שיבין וישכיל האדם מדבריו, לפי שהוא היה מופלג בחכמה"

But nothing I could find which supports the above statement that Maimonides called al-Farabi the 2nd master.

Unfortunately this statement seems to have been copied in many other web pages, whether they copied it from here or here is copied from there, this is not the way to do things!

Please either provide a source or remove this statement, thanks

Boiledspaghetti (talk) 16:24, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

origin of Farabi

He was originally Persian, from the golden age of Islam. He was born from Persian parents and his place of birth is currently in Kazakhstan. He lived in so many cities. There is no evidence of him being Turkish! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.233.2.105 (talk) 07:52, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Bias in Origin Theory

Greetings, @Qahramani44:. The sections about origin theory entail some biases against the Turkic origin. While the Persian section mentions a lot of sources which call him a Persian, the section lacks any theory. It implies the arguement, he spoke Persian and also what no English was found. This is all great and valid, but it is written in a way as it tries to oppose the Turkic origin specifically. On the other hand, the Turkic section downplays the arguements within the source. For example, the source given ("C. Edmund Bosworth (15 May 2017). The Turks in the Early Islamic World. Taylor & Francis. p. 381. ISBN 978-1-351-88087-9.) is only cited for the claim that ""great figures as al-Farabi, al-Biruni, and ibn Sina have been attached by over enthusiastic Turkish scholars to their race", but does not mention any arguement. The arguement within the source states that "Turcologist would be disappointed" because we will not found any traces of Turkic legacy. And yes, this is a valid arguement and should be mentioned in the article. But the context is not given. Instead quotes are invoked which simply state "he was not a Turk" and given some authorities. Especially, most often is Dimitri from the Encydlopedia Iranica cited. And yes, the lack of Turkish language is a valid one. However, the opposing views, for example the ones I added (also within the same source), stating that Turks already lived there and had no such nomadic life. As a Turkologist student myself, I know that a lack of Turkish language is not sufficent to conclude someone was not a Turk. Especially within the Persian culture, since Turks already mingled with Persians back when. Note, this is also supported by the sources. My edit summary was just to give context, I have not brought anything new (as some user asserted). However, the sections are written a if the Turkic origin was just some sort if "fringe" theory, that is not the case. Therefore I woul like to make some rewrites. Especially giving a context for the Persian theory, which just uses as much sources as possible and quotes from scholars to support their claim, but does not provide any actual theory. Furthermore, after checking the encyclopedia of Iranica, I would even object the statement about "many sources also consider him a Persian": "The sources from the 6th/12th century and later consist essentially of three biographical entries, all other extant reports on Fārābī being either dependent on them or even later fabrications: (1) the Syrian tradition or collection of biographical narratives on Fārābī represented by the entry by Ebn Abī Oṣaybeʿa (II, pp. 134-40), and to a lesser extent by Ebn al-Qefṭī (pp. 277-80); (2) the pro-Turkish tradition, compiled and composed as a continuous narrative by Ebn Ḵallekān with the purpose of documenting a Turkish ethnic origin for Fārābī (ed. ʿAbbās, V, pp. 153-57; tr. de Slane, III, pp. 307-11); and (c) the scanty and legendary Eastern tradition, represented by Ẓahīr-al-Dīn Bayhaqī (pp. 16-20, no. 17)." So basically, there are three traditions? Why stateing something about quantitiy in that case? But at last, the author is clearly against a Turkic origin for Farabi. This is fine and Dimitris interpretations are valid arguements, but yet, the sections are writte as if Dimitri's position is a matter of fact and as if there is a consens. For example, here you find a source preferring the Turkish-origin: "Z. B. Fakhry 2004, 111; Schupp 2005, xi; Black 1996, 178; Watt 1967, 115; Farmer 1952; Netton 1992, 5; Shlomo Pines: Philosophy. In: P. M. Holt et al. (Hrsg.): The Cambridge History of Islam. Vol. 2B, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1970, S. 780–823, hier S. 794:„...a descendant of a Central Asian Turkish family“; Henri Laoust: Les schismes dans l’Islam, Paris 1965, S. 158: „...né dans le Turkestan, à Fārāb, et sans doute d’origine turque, bien que l’iranisme le revendique aussi". "Al-Farabi and His School von Ian Richard Netton" Also speaks of Farabi as a son of a family of Turkish soldiers. I do not know what he is and do not claim to know, but many arguements provided to support a "clear proof for Persian origin" are not as clear as the article suggests or Dimitri claims to be. Especially considring he could be a descendant of Ghaznavids.--VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 20:41, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Your wall of text doesn't make any point besides the fact that you think he's a turk. Your WP:OR theorizing is completely baseless, not least because of the fact that you're not a historian and have no credentials to speculate on Farabi's origin. For "actual theory" see the countless sources in the Iranian-origin section which state the evidence and theory behind Biruni/the inhabitants of Farab being Iranic. There isn't much reason to remove the section by Dimitri Gutas, especially since he's pointing out the inconsistencies in the medieval Arabic manuscripts. --Qahramani44 (talk) 21:59, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

user:VenusFeuerFalle has legitimate points.The sources for Al Farabi being Persian are more generalizations by Westerners who used the term very different from how modern Iranians view the term Persian. There should be some indication here (and on Misplaced Pages overall) of this. The majority of historians indicate he was of Turkic ethnicity who spoke Farsi due to it being the dominant language in the region. Fareediaz (talk) 04:29, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

By "majority of historians" you mean turkic ethnicists who also claim other historical figures (Ibn Sina, Khwarazmi, etc.) as turks despite zero evidence for the latter either. There is no such thing as "Turkic ethnicity who spoke Farsi", that's just a cheap way to claim a figure from another ethnic group. It's as ridiculous as claiming Mehmet II as a "Greek who spoke turkish". The trustworthiness of Western (and other third-party) sources is that they are not blinded by ethnic bias and have no favoritism to either side, which is more than can be said for any turkish historian. The current article describes sources for both sides well enough. --Qahramani44 (talk) 16:36, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

• Former good article nominees
• All unassessed articles
• B-Class biography articles
• B-Class biography (science and academia) articles
• Mid-importance biography (science and academia) articles
• Science and academia work group articles
• WikiProject Biography articles
• B-Class Iran articles
• Mid-importance Iran articles
• WikiProject Iran articles
• B-Class Turkey articles
• Mid-importance Turkey articles
• All WikiProject Turkey pages
• B-Class Iraq articles
• Mid-importance Iraq articles
• WikiProject Iraq articles
• B-Class Syria articles
• Mid-importance Syria articles
• WikiProject Syria articles
• C-Class Islam-related articles
• Top-importance Islam-related articles
• C-Class Muslim scholars articles
• Top-importance Muslim scholars articles
• Muslim scholars task force articles
• WikiProject Islam articles
• C-Class Religion articles
• Top-importance Religion articles
• WikiProject Religion articles
• C-Class Philosophy articles
• High-importance Philosophy articles
• C-Class philosopher articles
• High-importance philosopher articles
• Philosophers task force articles
• C-Class social and political philosophy articles
• High-importance social and political philosophy articles
• Social and political philosophy task force articles
• C-Class philosophy of religion articles
• High-importance philosophy of religion articles
• Philosophy of religion task force articles
• C-Class Eastern philosophy articles
• High-importance Eastern philosophy articles
• Eastern philosophy task force articles
• C-Class Medieval philosophy articles
• High-importance Medieval philosophy articles
• Medieval philosophy task force articles
• C-Class Middle Ages articles
• Mid-importance Middle Ages articles
• C-Class history articles
• All WikiProject Middle Ages pages
• B-Class Central Asia articles
• Mid-importance Central Asia articles
• WikiProject Central Asia articles
• B-Class politics articles
• Mid-importance politics articles
• WikiProject Politics articles