Any Farsi linguists? How to name article?

[Howard C. Berkowitz]

For several articles, I need to refer to the controversial statement by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, often presented as [Israel] must be "wiped off the map". This is controversial, in part, because several reputable sources indicate that it's an inaccurate translation. I don't want to go into the arguments and counterarguments in this post, since they belong in the article, but how should the article be titled?

Is "wiped off the map", with or without quotes, a meaningful and not excessively dramatic article title? 

Perhaps there might be another article on Nikita Khruschev's comment "we will bury you", which, my Russian linguist friends tell me, is a literal translation, but is idiomatic; a better translation would be "we will outlive you and be at your funeral."  Both of these could be subarticles of an issue of linguistic issues in diplomacy--John F. Kennedy had less dramatic but funnier errors.

Anyone literate in Farsi?  Juan Cole, I believe, is among the best alternate translators, but there are others.

[Daniel Mietchen]

For several articles, I need to refer to the controversial statement by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, often presented as [Israel] must be "wiped off the map". This is controversial, in part, because several reputable sources indicate that it's an inaccurate translation. I don't want to go into the arguments and counterarguments in this post, since they belong in the article, but how should the article be titled?

Is "wiped off the map", with or without quotes, a meaningful and not excessively dramatic article title? 

He seems to have said

امام عزيز ما فرمودند كه اين رژيم اشغالگر قدس بايد از صفحه روزگار محو شود

where

صفحه

can best be translated as "page" and

روزگار

as "time", so a map (نقشه) is not implied. But if "wiped off the map" is what people are searching for in English, it may well become the title nonetheless, or at least a redirect.

From the point of wiki page titles, I would argue for leaving the quotes off.

[Joe Quick]

Does that really need to be an article of it's own?  It seems like something that should be clarified in other contexts (like articles on diplomacy in the region or the man himself) but not exist as a stand alone.

[Howard C. Berkowitz]

Does that really need to be an article of it's own?  It seems like something that should be clarified in other contexts (like articles on diplomacy in the region or the man himself) but not exist as a stand alone.

Well, if for no other than a practical matter, it would need to be a linkable heading, because it's referenced in many contexts.

It could easily be several pages of text to explain the full context, translation alternatives, history, the original source of the comment (Khomeini, not Ahmadinejad), etc.  That's article length.

[Daniel Mietchen]

Does that really need to be an article of it's own?  It seems like something that should be clarified in other contexts (like articles on diplomacy in the region or the man himself) but not exist as a stand alone.

Well, if for no other than a practical matter, it would need to be a linkable heading, because it's referenced in many contexts.

It could easily be several pages of text to explain the full context, translation alternatives, history, the original source of the comment (Khomeini, not Ahmadinejad), etc.  That's article length.

Funny to see notability arguments here but I concur with Howard that - given the international media attention the "quote" has received - the phrase merits to be put in that context and in the one of the speech and its date, location and audience.

[Peter Schmitt]

I would think of a subpage to Ahmadinejad,
or a page titled "Ahmadinejad and Israel" (or so).

Redirects from the quote (and variants) are possible, but are they really necessary?
Shouldn't search find the page that contains the quote?

[Daniel Mietchen]

I would think of a subpage to Ahmadinejad,
or a page titled "Ahmadinejad and Israel" (or so).

Redirects from the quote (and variants) are possible, but are they really necessary?
Shouldn't search find the page that contains the quote?

Google search does find it, generic wiki search not.

[Arne Eickenberg]

I suggest a general article on Antizionism. "Ahmadinejad and Israel" sounds like the man has a unique position, which is not the case, because there are many who reject the state of Israel, including many Jews, also a whole group inside the Jewish religion that rejects it for religious reasons. (Jewish Messiah hasn't come yet etc.) It's a very diverse subject. (Of course it doesn't mean that Ahmadinejad's position on Israel cannot be mentioned in his biographical article, or in the article about Iran's foreign policy.)

A comment on this:

It could easily be several pages of text to explain the full context, translation alternatives, history, the original source of the comment (Khomeini, not Ahmadinejad), etc.  That's article length.

That's what our subpages Addendum or Advanced are for, if I'm not mistaken.

[Howard C. Berkowitz]

I suggest a general article on Antizionism. "Ahmadinejad and Israel" sounds like the man has a unique position, which is not the case, because there are many who reject the state of Israel, including many Jews, also a whole group inside the Jewish religion that rejects it for religious reasons. (Jewish Messiah hasn't come yet etc.) It's a very diverse subject. (Of course it doesn't mean that Ahmadinejad's position on Israel cannot be mentioned in his biographical article, or in the article about Iran's foreign policy.)

A comment on this:

It could easily be several pages of text to explain the full context, translation alternatives, history, the original source of the comment (Khomeini, not Ahmadinejad), etc.  That's article length.

That's what our subpages Addendum or Advanced are for, if I'm not mistaken.

As Daniel points out, until we have an internal search mechanism that will look for specific strings, preferably with wildcards, it's going to be hard to find. Part of the problem is that an anti-Zionism, based on the number of subarticles under Zionism, is going to be lengthy.  Ahmadinejad speaks a great deal. I can think of a number of times, places, and subjects where an analysis will be non-stub length (e.g., the Columbia University speech).

[Joe Quick]

I'm not actually arguing that it shouldn't be an article, I'm just wondering about how it is best contextualized.  If I were researching and writing about it, I think I would place it in the context of -- and therefore the article about -- the Arab-Israeli conflict.  (By the way, what's with that label?  Wouldn't it be much more accurate to say Muslim-Israeli conflict or some such?)

[Howard C. Berkowitz]

I'm not actually arguing that it shouldn't be an article, I'm just wondering about how it is best contextualized.  If I were researching and writing about it, I think I would place it in the context of -- and therefore the article about -- the Arab-Israeli conflict.  (By the way, what's with that label?  Wouldn't it be much more accurate to say Muslim-Israeli conflict or some such?)

Absolutely not, but perhaps not for the reasons you think. The Christian significance of Jerusalem and the history of the Crusades apply; a number of the fighters in Lebanon are Arab Christians, and there are a surprising number of Christians in the Occupied Territories.

Now, there are problems, as Iranians and Druze and Turks and Kurds aren't Arabs, although the latter three are not especially anti-Israel.

Calling it Muslim-Israel does pick up Iran, but creates as many problems of another sort since there are quite pro-Israel Muslims. There's really no good name other than the "output of a male bovine characteristic of the Near East." Arab-Israeli is the most common usage, with Israeli-Palestinian for a subset.

[Howard C. Berkowitz]

For several articles, I need to refer to the controversial statement by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, often presented as [Israel] must be "wiped off the map". This is controversial, in part, because several reputable sources indicate that it's an inaccurate translation. I don't want to go into the arguments and counterarguments in this post, since they belong in the article, but how should the article be titled?

Is "wiped off the map", with or without quotes, a meaningful and not excessively dramatic article title? 

He seems to have said

امام عزيز ما فرمودند كه اين رژيم اشغالگر قدس بايد از صفحه روزگار محو شود

where

صفحه

can best be translated as "page" and

روزگار

as "time", so a map (نقشه) is not implied. But if "wiped off the map" is what people are searching for in English, it may well become the title nonetheless, or at least a redirect.

From the point of wiki page titles, I would argue for leaving the quotes off.

Thanks very much. I have a couple of references that use Roman transliteration of the Arabic orthography of Farsi, and I suspect they are more user-friendly than the more accurate non-transliterated language. I can barely sound out, with a reference at hand, the calligraphic script; but I have some knowledge of the context.

Actually, I've been fascinated by things I've recently learned about it. The first bad English translation seemed to come from the Iraqi Revolutionary News Agency, and the actual quote was not specific to his speech but from Khomeini. Some circulating translations are even more dramatically wrong.

He is not my nominee for Mr. Nice Guy, but some fairly loose interpretations of what he said are floating about and have taken on political momentum.

[Drew R. Smith]

I have no say on notability, but the basic issue of linking to it can be solved by using an anchor.

Drew