Talk:Movement of Salah al-Din the Kurd
Latest comment: 3 years ago by Applodion in topic Origin
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Movement of Salah al-Din the Kurd article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
Origin
editApplodion, your edit summary contradicts your text. Konli17 (talk) 11:38, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
- How? "mostly Kurdish mujahideen from Syria, Turkey, Iran, and Iraq" does not say "Kurds from Kurdistan". Tens of thousands of Kurds live outside areas regarded as Kurdistan in Syria, Turkey, Iran, and Iraq. For example, Aleppo, Damascus and Idlib have a large minority of Kurds. These cities are not considered part of Kurdistan. Furthermore, why do you try to put Kurdistan into this article - these fighters are literally Islamists who strive for a unified ummah, an idea usually in opposition to nationalist divisions. Accordingly, they regard themselves as champions of Kurds, not as champions of Kurdistan. Applodion (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
Your first point is correct, which is why I qualified the sentence with 'mostly'. Your second point indicates you are viewing Kurdistan solely through the prism of the Kurdish nationalists who would like it to become an independent state, and not in any of the other ways it can be viewed, such as a cultural region. It's not just Kurdish nationalists who use the term. Konli17 (talk) 14:01, 21 November 2020 (UTC)- Yes, but this group is specifically Islamist, and thus part of a broader movement which has been one of the main opponents of Kurdistan - as an concept in general - in the last few years. Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi even says in his article that the group often uses Turkish instead of Kurdish, while its members reject the concept of Kurds as separate from the Islamic ummah (they seem to mostly see themselves in the tradition of Jaban al-Kurdi and Saladin, both of whom lived most of their time outside Kurdistan). The group thus operates outside Kurdistan, many of its recruits come from areas outside Kurdistan, and the faction does not refer to Kurdistan at all (based on the sources we have). So why should Wikipedia associate this faction with Kurdistan? Applodion (talk) 14:39, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
Would it be a problem for Wikipedia to associate Kurdish nationalists or Islamic State supporters from Syria with Syria, given their rejection of it? Konli17 (talk) 14:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)- Yes, if they would outright reject and managed to completely cast off their statehood - but only then. One has to differentiate nationality from place of origin. After all, Syria is (in this context) a state, not a region (that would be al-Sham). For example, if a Kurdish nationalist holds Syrian nationality and engages in a Syrian political framework, we have to mention Syria. If a person rejects their original nationality and declares themselves stateless, however, it would be a different matter. This is even more true for entire groups. For example, we do not say that ISIL mostly recruits from al-Sham, the Levant, "Arabistan" or "Arab areas"; we tell the readers that most of their recruits come from Syria and Iraq - although ISIL considers these states invalid. We do so because Syria and Iraq are recognized countries whose citizens hold their nationality if they want it or not. In the end, it is easier to reject a cultural / ethnic region than to reject nationality, and that is reflected in Wikipedia. Applodion (talk) 15:04, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
If they "managed to completely cast off their statehood"? What does that mean? It's difficult to understand the thrust of your argument. I've no problem with talking about the states that Movement of Salah al-Din the Kurd members come from, where appropriate. But this is the lede, and we have a handy common name for the Kurdish parts of the four states mentioned. Konli17 (talk) 13:07, 23 November 2020 (UTC)- "managed to completely cast off their statehood" merans becoming stateless or switching nationality. It was worded badly, soory for that. The issue remains, however, that this faction does not operate in Kurdistan and might not even recruit Kurds from Kurdistan. That's main main issue with your proposal. We have no idea how many members of this group even come from any area regarded as part of Kurdistan, plus the group does not seem to regard Kurdistan as important for their identity. So why add it to the lede? Applodion (talk) 13:16, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, if they would outright reject and managed to completely cast off their statehood - but only then. One has to differentiate nationality from place of origin. After all, Syria is (in this context) a state, not a region (that would be al-Sham). For example, if a Kurdish nationalist holds Syrian nationality and engages in a Syrian political framework, we have to mention Syria. If a person rejects their original nationality and declares themselves stateless, however, it would be a different matter. This is even more true for entire groups. For example, we do not say that ISIL mostly recruits from al-Sham, the Levant, "Arabistan" or "Arab areas"; we tell the readers that most of their recruits come from Syria and Iraq - although ISIL considers these states invalid. We do so because Syria and Iraq are recognized countries whose citizens hold their nationality if they want it or not. In the end, it is easier to reject a cultural / ethnic region than to reject nationality, and that is reflected in Wikipedia. Applodion (talk) 15:04, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, but this group is specifically Islamist, and thus part of a broader movement which has been one of the main opponents of Kurdistan - as an concept in general - in the last few years. Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi even says in his article that the group often uses Turkish instead of Kurdish, while its members reject the concept of Kurds as separate from the Islamic ummah (they seem to mostly see themselves in the tradition of Jaban al-Kurdi and Saladin, both of whom lived most of their time outside Kurdistan). The group thus operates outside Kurdistan, many of its recruits come from areas outside Kurdistan, and the faction does not refer to Kurdistan at all (based on the sources we have). So why should Wikipedia associate this faction with Kurdistan? Applodion (talk) 14:39, 21 November 2020 (UTC)