Talk:Persian traditional music

Removing of copyvio material

I removed a lot of material, but before anyone blames me for it, keeping it there would have it remain a copyright violation...see here [1]...plus, it wasn't NPOV anyway. "Artistic gift of the Perisan people"?! -- Natalinasmpf 13:15, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well, the Iranchamber itself has been known to engage in copyvios: They've lifted a number of color illustrations from Osprey Military books. Besides, you're an anarcho-communist opposed to plutocrats and their oppresive copyright systems, aren't you? --Jpbrenna 02:25, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Iran isn't a signatory to the copyright treaty, technically they can take anything they want and so can you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.251.108.100 (talk) 20:21, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Great Article, but...

Why no mention of the rise of Modern Persian music (Persian Pop)? Kirbytime 22:49, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

See here: Persian pop music.Sangak 20:25, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

It is a really good article, thank you but two of your links fail. Failing links are;

1. Radif (PDF)
2. About Persian classical music —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.184.18.72 (talk) 19:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm questioning the neutral point of view and the origin of the second large paragraph under "Major Instruments", which seems a bit off topic. 108.208.141.237 (talk) 17:15, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Wiki Title is Wrong

Please consider changing the title and contents to Iranian traditional music instead of Persian. Many of the artists and ensembles mentioned on this page are not of Persian origin, but are in fact Kurds. Iran is not Persian, just like as Persian is not Iran. The ancient Empires weren't known as Persian Empires either. This article is full of misconceptions. Changing everything Persian (except when it refers to someone of the Persian ethnicity) is simply put: wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.82.163.173 (talk) 18:31, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Title

Since the article is supposed to cover the classical music of modern-day Iran and its historical background throughout various eras, it is inaccurate and somewhat impossible to use the controversial archaic term of Persia.
This term needs to be replaced with Iran, the well-established official demonym of the country.
—Rye-96 (talk) 15:30, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Support 'Persian' and 'Iranian' are not interchangeable. The word 'Persian' pertains of an ethnic group, while 'Iranian' pertains to the nationality. And only half or Iranians are Persians. Lets change "Persian" to "Iranian" in the title, to include the other ethnicities such as Kurds and Azerbaijanis. And the unsigned IP poster above this also seems supportive of this. Amin (Talk) 20:55, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

True. I'd say we should think of it as "the traditional music of Persia" vs. "the traditional music of Iran". The latter makes more sense for sure, while the archaic term would lead the article into a complex direction.
However, if we are to keep the archaic word in the lede because of the use of it in some sources, I think a simple a.k.a. can be a solution.
—Rye-96 (talk) 21:51, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Not this again. Persian is archaic in a modern political context. It is still current in historical and cultural contexts. Not everyone in Germany is ethnically German, either. Genealogizer (talk) 05:45, 4 June 2017 (UTC) <--- CU blocked sock of User:Bobby Martnen

Right, but Germany's official and only dymonym is German. Not a rational comparison at all.
—Rye-96 (talk) 15:21, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

And Persia's official and only demonym in English would have been Persian if the Shah hadn't been influenced by Nazi ideology and thus desired to convince people that Persians were "Aryan". What's your point? 2601:246:C003:C110:19E:4294:C102:3966 (talk) 03:25, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 2 June 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) —Guanaco 23:12, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

---

Persian traditional music → Iranian traditional music – Replacing the archaic term of Persia with the well-established official demonym. — See also: Talk:Persian traditional music#Title. Rye-96 (talk) 22:03, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). TonyBallioni (talk) 01:59, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

• Comment – Rye-96: sending this to an RM since a change in names could be controversial. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:59, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
• Opppose - While it is incorrect to use Persia in a modern political context, it is still appropriate in a cultural context, and things named after places usually retain their names, even after the place is officially renamed. (See Peking duck, Leghorn chicken, or even Persian cat) It's also worth noting that even when you exclude Wikipedia results, "Persian traditional music" still gets almost twice as many hits as "Iranian traditional music". When you reverse the first two terms, "traditional Persian music" gets more than twice as many hits as "traditional Iranian music" Genealogizer (talk) 05:43, 4 June 2017 (UTC) <--- CU blocked sock of User:Bobby Martnen

• This is a quite different case. Persian cat is a term culturally used in the West to refer to that species, while this article is supposed to refer to the traditional music of Iran and it is rather reasonable to use the official demonym.
  The search result argument is not a good excuse. You must consider the fact that the term Persian, apart from being an archaic exonym for the country, would also specifically refer to the traditional music associated with the Persian people, and this is while the classical music of Iran includes some regional variations (e.g. Kurdish traditional music, Azeri traditional music, Balochi traditional music) which cannot be referred to as Persian (especially while being discussed specifically). That's what makes it complex and controversial, and also what makes the search results unreliable in my opinion.
  —Rye-96 (talk) 15:17, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Comment You're the nominator, you don't need to vote support for your own proposal. Given that this is about traditional music, use of the traditional exonym is appropriate, keeping in mind it was official until 1935. While Persia is archaic in a modern political context, it is not archaic in a historical cultural context. Traditional music is both historical and cultural. Genealogizer (talk) 15:34, 4 June 2017 (UTC) <--- CU blocked sock of User:Bobby Martnen

Alright; I removed the tag. I was just pointing out that I'm supporting the idea.
Well, I think that's a disregard of the complexity of the issue. I still believe that the official demonym would be the proper and impartial term.
How about classical music of Iran, besides an a.k.a. Persian traditional music in the lede? This can also be a good idea from the point of view that the term traditional itself usually refers to folk music, rather than classical music.
—Rye-96 (talk) 16:06, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm fine with including also known as classical music of Iran in the lede, but the page is currently at the right title. Genealogizer (talk) 16:37, 4 June 2017 (UTC) <--- CU blocked sock of User:Bobby Martnen

• Support - Rye-96 pretty much said it all. --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:56, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose – This is another example of editors who are 'specialists' in a subject area, or are non-native speakers of English, that want to right the great wrong of using the common English terminology, so as to correct some perceived imperfection in it. This article is about Persian traditional music. In English, the term "Persia" is used in a broad sense that refers to more than just to "Pars" (Fars). The problems cited by Rye-96 do not exist in English. "Persian" is not archaic in a cultural context, and is retained for subjects such as these. The supposed 'error' of using a term derived from "Pars" to refer to something proper to Iran is not something that Wikipedia can correct. This is simply a feature of the English language. I'm sure if I were to take the time to go through the Persian language, I'd find various exonyms for other countries, cultures, places. All languages have these, and it is not Wikipedia's job to erase them, no matter what 'errors' they may contain. If a certain term is the most common term for a certain subject in the English language, we use that term, per WP:UCN. We can examine commonality by looking at Google Ngrams. On a broader level, if we look at a comparison between "Persian music" and "Iranian music", one will see that "Persian music" has always been more common in English. If we narrow the search to "Persian traditional music" and "Iranian traditional music", no results are returned at all for "Iranian traditional music". On this basis, there is no way that the term "Iranian traditional music" is acceptable for this subject. RGloucester — ☎ 17:10, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

• Comment @RGloucester: Please assume good faith when commenting about the motivations of others to propose a name change. Your accusations seem unfounded, and out of touch. Amin (Talk) 18:46, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
• @RGloucester: I never said I was a "specialist". I don't understand this behavior. Remember that discussions are supposed to be kept civil.
  What you're saying is true about 20th-century English language, prior to 1935. In contemporary terminology, Persia and Persian are archaic terms if replacing Iran and Iranian.
  Wikipedia is not supposed to "correct" the issue, and I wasn't suggesting that. But it is Wikipedia's duty to be impartial. The search result argument is unreliable, since the terms Persian and Iranian are not always treated synonymous. Iran's local Kurdish, Azeri and Balochi traditional/classical music cannot be referred to as Persian; thus, sources which would cover information about them would not use the term Persian. In other words, we could say the traditional music associated with Persians has been discussed more on the web than all sorts of traditional Iranian music collectively.
  That's why I believe it has to be dealt with regarding classical music of Iran vs. classical music of Persia.
  By the way, check the results again; "Iranian traditional music" occurs in over 45,000 results.
  —Rye-96 (talk) 18:52, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Persian traditional music occurs in over 84,000, significantly more than 45,000. Genealogizer (talk) 19:10, 4 June 2017 (UTC) <--- CU blocked sock of User:Bobby Martnen

I know. That was in response to "no results are returned at all for 'Iranian traditional music'".
—Rye-96 (talk) 19:21, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Please look at the Ngrams that I linked. First of all, they show that "Persian" in this context, dominates "Iranian", even in the present day. The results are charted by year, and therefore this is easily verifiable. Therefore, you argument about the "archaic" nature of "Persian" falls apart. 1935 has nothing to do with anything. An official proclamation does not change the English language as spoken by English speakers. It is up to people who use the language, academics, journalists, etc., to decide whether to take up such a change, or not do so. In this particular context, that of 'traditional music', they have not done so. Reliable sources, to the present day, consistently prefer "Persian traditional music". The "no results..." sentence that I wrote was in reference to the Google Ngrams I cited. Please look at these again, and you will see "no results" for "Iranian traditional music" in reliable sources such as books.

"Persian" and "Iranian" are synonyms in the English language. I know this can be hard to grasp, but that's how it is. The fact that the word "Persian" holds multiple meanings does not change the fact that this music is called "Persian", even if that is a misnomer by your own personal standards. We follow common usage in reliable English sources, per our policy on using common names, and your claims are not backed up by usage in reliable sources. What I meant by my first comment was that, because you do not have distance from the subject, you cannot be objective. You are not a native English speaker. You are Iranian, and you understand the words "Iran", "Persia", &c., in a way that is very different, and perhaps deeper, than an English speaker does. For this reason, you, working within that mental framework, feel that "Persian" as a label for this music is wrong, even if English speakers the world over use it for this subject, as is demonstrated by reliable sources. Unfortunately, your personal feelings about the "wrongness" of an English exonym cannot be the basis for change on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is written in English, and follows English common usage. It is also based on reliable sources. Until English reliable sources feel the same way about "Persian" as you do, there can be no endorsing of the change you propose here. RGloucester — ☎ 21:28, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

@RGloucester: Things are being mixed up here.
In present-day terminology, if not yesterday's (!), the term Persian is (at least occasionally) not synonymous with Iranian—where it occurs as a group of Iranians with a particular cultural system.
Persian as a nationality, in the sense "from Persia", is definitely archaic (because the term Persia as a nation is archaic); but Persian as an ethnicity, referring to the branch of Iranians, is not.
Accordingly, "Persian" would (at least occasionally) be a hyponym of "Iranian". And I'm talking about its use in English, not in Persian.
Thus, "Persian traditional music" would refer specifically to a branch of the traditional music of Iran belonging to the Persians—which is actually true, since other groups of Iranians do have their own versions.
This makes the comparison between the search results of "Persian traditional music" and "Iranian traditional music" technically unreliable, at least partially. It's like saying the term lesbian has to replace homosexual, because it occurs in more search results (!).
This is why I'm suggesting it has to be regarding classical music of Iran VS classical music of Persia—where you can see you do get more results for "Iran".
—Rye-96 (talk) 00:02, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but you really haven't the latitude to do original research and analysis on this manner. I perfectly aware of the narrower meaning of the word "Persian", but this meaning is subsidiary in English to the broader meaning, which is the one being used by this article, and by the relevant reliable sources that make-up the Google Ngrams searches above. "Persian traditional music" refers to "Persian traditional music", which is the subject of this article, and indeed, the original title of this article. Google Ngrams shows no results in reliable sources for either "classical music of Iran" or "classical music of Persia", but does show that "Persian classical music" dominates "Iranian classical music". If we take a look at any of the books found by the Ngrams search, it is clear that the meaning used is the broader one. As an example, look at this book. It dates to 1990 at first printing, though this is a newer edition. Read the page linked, and what will you see? Talk about the "westernisation of Persia" during the Pahlavi dynasty, and simultaneous talk about classes on "Persian traditional music" at the University of Tehran. Are you going to claim that this book is referring to westernisation of Pars/Fars? I think that you can see that the way that you view this matter simply isn't the way the word "Persian" is used in English. RGloucester — ☎ 05:35, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

@RGloucester: Home come that's an original research? I'm not self-formulating the title; I'm suggesting something which is actually in use. Take the Classical music of the United Kingdom article, for example. I think that's a similar situation, where they have dealt with it with a title which also results in nothing using your suggested way of naming an article.
Complaining on some individual example like this is actually what original research is. Look up on the web for Kurdish traditional music, Azeri traditional music and Balochi traditional music, and you will see that these terms exist; and, ask people who are a little familiar with the case, they cannot, ever, be replaced with Persian. What you're suggesting regarding Persian traditional music VS Iranian traditional music is pretty much like this.
You are, again, insisting to ignore the complexity of the term Persian in present-day English terminology. I'm not saying Persian traditional music has to be removed from the lede, since it does imply that way in many sources; but if the article's title get moved to classical music of Iran, it would help the accuracy of the reference, which has to be to the present-day state of Iran, and would be impartial.
—Rye-96 (talk) 18:30, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm aware that Kurdish traditional music exists, &c., but this article is about "Persian traditional music", not about Kurdish music (which is covered at Kurdish music) or Azeri music (which is covered at Azerbaijani folk music, amongst other places). Again, I'm aware of the fact that there are multiple meanings to the word Persian...but we follow reliable sources on this. We don't try to improve accuracy independent of the way in which reliable sources use a word. If reliable sources find "Persian" accurate enough for this subject, then so does Wikipedia. RGloucester — ☎ 19:10, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

• Support move to Classical music of Iran – Much better, and deals with the entire issue at once. - LouisAragon (talk) 18:38, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

A title found that has 'zero results' in Google Ngrams does not meet the requirements set forth by WP:AT. RGloucester — ☎ 19:10, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Disagreed. Both of the suggested titles are well-attested and clear.
@HistoryofIran, Amin, and LouisAragon: What do you think? Would you agree with either classical music of Iran or Iranian traditional music (or traditional Iranian music) if they could replace the current title?
—Rye-96 (talk) 22:59, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Well, I would go for Classical music of Iran. --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:56, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm not an exert on this, but since you pinged me.. My preference goes to "Traditional music of Iran". I think it flows better than "Iranian traditional music". And I like 'traditional' more than 'classical', perhaps I associate 'classical music' with European composers. Again, I am not an expert on this. Amin (Talk) 15:42, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

I think the preposition of (instead of in) would make it clear that it's a native thing.
—Rye-96 (talk) 16:35, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Once again, Persian is the standard term in cultural contexts. In the English language, Iran and Iranian are only preferred in political and post-1935 historical contexts. Cultural and pre-1935 contexts are still usually Persian in English. Just like how Burma is now officially Myanmar but the language is still Burmese. 2601:246:C003:C110:19E:4294:C102:3966 (talk) 03:24, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

That's not quite factual. It's more like an alternative, and would actually be pretty contradictory in this occasion.
The terms Iran and Iranian would be more precise and consistent, and are definitely practical for this use in English.
—Rye-96 (talk) 11:15, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Funny, this random IP (with only two edits) uses the exact same silly comparison and style of logic as another person :)[2] --HistoryofIran (talk) 15:35, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran: No surprise. A lot of users/IPs are obsessed with this term, just because it supposedly sounds better to them.
But let's assume good faith.
—Rye-96 (talk) 16:02, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose. Most of the article deals with pre-1935 material. —  AjaxSmack  17:03, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

The article is supposed to be about Iran's classical music, not Persia's.
If it was specifically created to cover pre-1935 material, then this argumentation would make sense.
—Rye-96 (talk) 06:48, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose. As RG showed, "Persian" is more commonly used than "Iranian" to describe the music in reliable English-language sources. As is the case with Persian language, etc. And the article itself describes the music as belonging to "Greater Iran", which is not the same as the modern country. If there should be a separate article including the non-Persian traditional music of modern Iran, that's fine. But that's not this article. Dohn joe (talk) 17:22, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

In what way is this related to the case of the Persian language, Dohn joe? Like, what case are you referring to?
What do you think the Persian language would've been referred to instead of Persian?...
The article's lede, in the current edition, does mention Greater Iran as a supposed area across which the music is "appreciated and enjoyed", but it is clearly an unsourced self-formulated add-up. And then again, "Greater Iran" is not a synonym for "Persia".
A separate article to include "the non-Persian traditional music of modern Iran"? But this article is already referring to archaeological records from ancient Elam, ridiculously referring to it as Persia, besides the music of the Safavid and Qajar eras.
This article is certainly about modern-day Iran's classical music, not ancient Iran's classical music.
—Rye-96 (talk) 20:39, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

The only reason that English-speakers call Persia Iran today is because some Persian officials of the 1930s thought that it sounded similar to Aryan and admired Hitler. Genealogizer (talk) 20:51, 15 June 2017 (UTC) <--- CU blocked sock of User:Bobby Martnen

Is that so, Genealogizer? :)
Would you please add a reference to where this information comes from?
—Rye-96 (talk) 21:20, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Suggestion

Good work so far. How about including a list of artists of Persian traditional music, both old and new, in this article as well? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.54.54.94 (talk) 03:50, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Recommendation to make article even better

Unfortunately my knowledge on music is very little, however, I know that all the very similar musics of the Iranian peoples makes up what is Iranian music. Music of the Kurdish, Azeri, Persian, Balochi, Luri, Mazandarani, Gilak, Pashtun, Tajik etc are all what makes it up. If there is someone knowledgeable enough on this topic, it would be very good if they can add these sections into it.

Title

Why is the title referred to as "Persian" traditional music. As of today, out of the historical context, Persian is associated with the Persian ethnic group. Persians are one of the Iranian peoples. Just like the name of the country Iran which is derived from the Iranian peoples. The very large majority of the ethnic groups in Iran are of the Iranian peoples and simply labeling it "Persian" isn't correct. Although all the music is very very similar, it must be noted that there are a few different sub-groups of this music family as well. Sub-groups such as Azerbaijani, Kurdish, Baloch, Tajik, Pashtun, Lur, Gilak, Mazandarani etc music. Stating simply Persian will confuse many as nowadays it is used to refer to an ethnic group. I would propose changing the title the Iranian traditional music. Migboy123 (talk) 11:17, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Mehmoonifinal2.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:41, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

• Hasht-Behesht Palace ney and Tar.jpg
• Kamancheh player (by Ibrahim Jabbar-Beik).jpg
• Painting ney.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:56, 29 March 2021 (UTC)