Talk:Avicenna

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Page name[edit]

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

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

No, this is the English Wikipedia, so the legit title is Avicenna. Your remark about Al-Farabi is irrelevant, since in English, he's called Al-Farabi, not Alpharabius. Best.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 22:30, 5 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Medicine[edit]

The Cannon of Medicine, an encyclopaedia of medicine was the first medical book in the European schools and was used by the scientists of the Middle Ages and Renaissance. There were already 15 issues in Latin and one in hibru at the end of XVth century. Ibn Sina indicated the infectious character of tuberculosis in that book. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.192.94.168 (talk) 02:55, 31 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

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

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:34, 8 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

Section on Theology[edit]

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

Extra information on Ibn Sina move to Urgench[edit]

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

Removal of newly added material[edit]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References[edit]

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

RfC[edit]

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

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

  • Oppose OP's similiar proposal is already opposed by the majority, yet he proceeded to do a RFC here as well. I believe it is about time an admin took a look at this. Majority of the sources either dont state that Avicenna was Sogdian or they arent reliable. The only exception is Foltz (in an interview, not even a book), who says that Avicena may have spoken Sogdian, not that he did. The vast majority of sources call Avicenna a Persian (again, read WP:UNDUE), some examples;
  1. Ibn Sīnā, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition - He was born in 370/980 in Afshana, his mother's home, near Bukhara. His native language was Persian
  2. Medicine is a science by which we learn about the conditions of the human body. Its purpose is to preserve health when well and restore health when ill;’ a famous definition of medicine by the Persian polymath of the eleventh century, Avicenna. - Reflections on Avicenna’s impact on medicine: his reach beyond the Middle East
  3. We have rubais by Avicenna (d. 428/1037), the greatest of the Persian philosophers, whom 'Umar regarded as his master and whose encyclopaedic work - Cambridge History of Iran, vol 4
  4. Many of these achievements were later collated and made known in the West through the writings of another Persian, the great Avicenna (born Ibn Sina, 980–1037). A History of Iran, Axworthy, page 81
  5. Abu ‘Ali al-Hasan Ibn Sina (ca. 980–1037 CE), known in Latin as Avicenna, was a physician, natural philosopher, mathematician, poetic mystic, and princely minister. Of Persian descent, he was born in Afshana in the province of Bukhara - p 369, Medieval Islamic Civilization: An Encyclopedia, Volume 1
  6. This books deals with the philosophy of Ibn Sina - Avicenna as he was known in the Latin West - a Persian Muslim - Avicenna's Al-Shifā': Oriental Philosophy
--HistoryofIran (talk) 21:17, 17 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support: There is no WP:OR and no WP:UNDUE. There are multiple reliable sources by acknowledged scholars supporting the new material. History of Iran, I appreciated it when you once corrected yourself, but making personal attacks is as bad as being uncivil. Okay, so now we have one source stating his native language was Persian. That makes it even.[6] You forgot to provide sources supporting his mother being anything different from Tajik. Finally, speaking of "origin" or "ethnicity", we don't know whether the sources you provided mean "Persian" as a synonym for "Iranian" or Iranian from Persia, ethnic Persian. This is also due to the fact Avicenna was not born in Persia, but in Sogdia. Again, I do not see WP:OR and WP:UNDUE, and as per Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, I would include everything.--Haldir Marchwarden (talk) 21:53, 17 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment - If sources are found? then it's not original research. As for weight? I shall leave that for others to decide, if the proposed info is too much or not. GoodDay (talk) 23:29, 17 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose The question seems to be, was he Sogdian or Persian? The difference seems somewhat irrelevant: Sogdia by the looks of it was essentially and then actually Persian. As a practical matter, Persian has much more meaning to the average reader than Sogdian, which I had not heard of until just now. Combined with HistoryofIrans sources, dont see the reason to change. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 21:43, 17 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    CaptainEek, I see what you are saying, and I agree with you on Sogdia. But by that line of reasoning, the list of "Notable Sogdians" at Sogdia either is to be removed or it is fair to include Avicenna there, or is it? I ask you to address the other two additions: claim about Tajik mother and Sogdian as native language (according to Foltz). Should we include that? As "possible"?--Haldir Marchwarden (talk) 21:59, 17 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose - First of all, this proposal is directly based on reliable, secondary sources and so does not qualify as original research (for something to be OR, it must either involve an inappropriate use of primary sources, or far-fetched inferences from secondary sources, which is not the case here). Second, Dimitri Gutas, one of the foremost experts on Avicenna, notes in his 2014 Avicenna and the Aristotelian Tradition (2nd ed.), p. xi that especially in Iran, where in later centuries (and also because of his presumed Persian origins) he was elevated to a most revered status, he was considered a representative of a mystical philosophy whose origins allegedly go back to a pre-Islamic Persian spirituality. Western scholarship in the twentieth century followed by and large this spurious later tradition.[b] Apparently, Gutas is quite unsure about such specific claims on Avicenna's origins (cf. also his impenetrable article on Avicenna's biography in Eir, which neither says that he's Persian nor that he is Sogdian nor anything else), and he seems especially skeptical about the ubiquitous claims for a presumed Persian origin. But, and this is my third point, this whole matter is a question of due weight. Claims for a Persian origin are indeed ubiquitous, and thus isolated and passing mentions of him as Sogdian such as those of Corbin et al. carry only little weight. At the very least, these are opinions which should not be stated as facts, but rather attributed to their authors in-text ("According to Yarshater, ... However, according to Corbin, etc."). But then context matters, and I seriously question whether such passing mentions by scholars (and this applies both to passing mentions of him as Persian and as Sogdian) should get such extensive coverage by us: this would in itself be undue. As Gutas documents in his Eir article, a scholarly biography of Avicenna still needs to be written, and until then we should probably say as little as possible about it. We won't accomplish that by adding stuff about possible Sogdian origins, which is why I oppose. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 01:26, 18 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    User:Apaugasma thanks for your comment, this is the kind of reasoned comments I like to read. I see what you are saying. But here's the thing, and I ask this in earnest, are you positive that (regardless of Gutas) "Persian" in the ubiquitous claims by English-native-speakers equals with "ethnic Persian" and is not a synonym of Iranian, which is quite often the case in English speaking world? This question could arise anyhow, but in this case especially because Avicenna was actually born in Sogdia. The "Sogdians" were Iranians. Yes, Gutas very likely speaks of "Persian-Persian", but, like you said, he is skeptical speaking of "presumed origins" ans "spurious claims". If it were for me, I would call him neither a Sogdian nor a Persian but use another word, such as "Muslim polymath" or "Polymath from the Samanid Empire". Context matters, but it is also up to us to put in Wikipedia stuff that makes sense and we are positive about. Was he an ethnic Persian though? Was he "Sogdian"? Was he a Muslim from the Samanid Empire?
What about the pieces about it being possible to call his mother a Tajik[5][6] and his native language may well have been Sogdian?[6] Claims that his mother was anything other than Tajik/Sogdian don't seem to be ubiquitous, and I saw only one source saying his native language was Persian. Foltz, who differently from Gutas is proposing something, not rejecting it, is quite reliable, and his proposal makes sense given context and the other sources provided.[4][2][1][3]--Haldir Marchwarden (talk) 10:20, 18 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
See the thing is that since sources don't really care about where his mother was from, neither should we (that is the true meaning of WP:NPOV: we say as much and as little as the sources do). I thought for a while about using "Iranian" rather than "Persian", but that would be unduly applying a linguistic category (Sogdian was an Eastern Iranian language) to a statement of cultural background (kind of like when people used to speak about 'Semites', as if the linguistic category meant anything at all in cultural terms; this should really be avoided). Given the skepticism of a top-tier expert like Gutas, I would perhaps consider supporting replacing "Persian" by "Muslim", but then I also think that "Persian" is fine given the fact that Avicenna lived at the start of the 10th/11th century Persian Renaissance and clearly lived and worked in that cultural atmosphere. That's also probably why the sources speak so easily about "Persian", and as long as no expert comes up to explicitly refute this, we should follow that general tendency in the sources. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 16:25, 18 September 2021 (UTC) PS I'm glad you find my comment reasoned, but it would be nice if you, once you are unblocked, also would stick to reasoned comments on talk pages rather than taking refuge to disruptive editing and personal attacks. Thanks.Reply[reply]
  • Oppose per Apaugasma above.A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Talk 11:17, 18 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose - unless and until additional sources can be found to support this assertion. Until it can be effectively verified, it remains close to original research and giving it undue weight would most certainly be a problem. Should better (or just more) sources be found, this should absolutely be revisited. St★lwart111 13:07, 18 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose. This material is not encyclopedic wording. And we have no way of ever knowing what his native language was (Persia at various points was a broad empire encompassing more than one language, but with Persian as the prestige language). He is known, however, as a Persian figure. Strongly agree with Apaugasma about confusion of linguistic and general cultural labels.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  20:41, 18 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose As per WP:UNDUE and WP:OR.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 18:49, 21 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

References[edit]

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

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Namely (italics): (in the lead) "[Avicenna] was a Persian or Sogdian"[1][2][3] (Early Life) "Avicenna was born in Afshana, a village near Bukhara (in present-day Uzbekistan), in Sogdiana,[4] then the capital of the Samanids, a Persian dynasty in Central Asia and Greater Khorasan." (Early life) "His mother, named Sitāra, was from Bukhara, a local that may be regarded as a Tajik.[5][6] (Early life) "Avicenna's native language may well have been Sogdian."[6]
  2. ^ Corrected "latter" to "later" and summarized middle part (not in green).
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Invention of steam distillation by Avicenna[edit]

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

Wrong Section[edit]

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

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

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

Under medieval section

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

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

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

Birthplace[edit]

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

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

Origin of Ibn Sina[edit]

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

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

Was he a persian ?[edit]

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

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

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

This is impossible to know. The ethnicity then was not the ethnicity now. All we have are sources referring to him as Persian. WP:RS Game Set Match. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:21, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It should be purged from the lead though per mos:ethnicity. Wiqi(55) 16:39, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Persian name of Ibn Sina[edit]

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

Sources:

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

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

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

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

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Avicenna&oldid=1140768824"