Talk:Al-Khwarizmi

You can’t just delete people opinions about his Arabian origins

Another example of stealing Arabian famous figures like Saladin who was an Arabian leader who spoke Arabic as we can easily read from his speeches that historians copy in books and on his currency , and his family member who was ruler for a century after him all had confirmed that they are Arabic but still Wikipedia address him as Kurdish not Arabic. in this example al-Khwarizmi was in Baghdad speaks only Arabic never wrote a book in Persian , there is no one single evidence of his Persian roots except that he was born in Uzbekistan (not Persia) which was part of Arabian empire with many Arabs family traveled there so he may be Arabian or Uzbekistanian more than to be Persian , still Wikipedia doesn’t let people to correct this misleading information about those Arabic stolen figures. so I am here just to make sure that someone mention this information “But he was Arabian” Jaffar algaragoly (talk) 09:20, 22 September 2024 (UTC) Jaffar algaragoly (talk) 20:40, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

If you don’t believe in evidence to support your claim of stealing Arabian figures , at least have the decency to accept people’s different opinions on the subject, as long as we provide evidence

no wonder Wikipedia is not trusted as a scientific reference , because editors like you who corrupted it and deceived all the facts and truths Jaffar algaragoly (talk) 20:44, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

no wonder Wikipedia is not trusted as a scientific reference , because editors like you who corrupted it and deceived all the facts and truths

This is quite ironic. This article is sourced with WP:RS - your claims are based on your own opinion. In fact, WP:RS even goes against your claims, eg "In Central Asia, the meaning of previously-existing group names was changed and given an ethnic content. Some groups were declared part of the Uzbek nation, and the boundaries of an entity called “Uzbekistan” (which had never existed before) were delimited (Carlisle 1991b, p.24). - page 1991, Power, Networks and Violent Conflict in Central Asia: A Comparison of Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, Routledge HistoryofIran (talk) 21:25, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Ok , now we are friends , please take time to reply and discuss with me about my opinions instead of just deleting my comments

Then I can show you more evidence, but if you keep deleting people opinions it’s just make things worse Jaffar algaragoly (talk) 21:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

I didn't delete your comment, but I probably should have per WP:SOAPBOX/WP:FORUM. And no, I'm not discussing your opinions with you, since we base our info on WP:RS (as u have already been told several times). HistoryofIran (talk) 22:26, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the criteria of what's considered reliable for Wikipedia just: It considers something as true if a mainstream media source simply say so, even if it's just an editorial with little to no evidence to support it. Such as someone saying Al-Khwarizmi is Persian, without presenting any evidence to support it.

You and your other Persian editors seem to take full advantage of this fact to present a false image of your history, one where the average viewer wouldn't realize that a mighty Persian wouldn't be able to name a single Persian scientist before the conquest of the Arabs. ChoseADifferentName (talk) 13:26, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Looks like you didn't read WP:RS. Please also read WP:ASPERSIONS/WP:NPA and keep your personal thoughts about other users to yourself. If you truly have proof that I am being disruptive, feel free to report me to WP:ANI, it will be a nice WP:OUCH. HistoryofIran (talk) 13:30, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi History of Iran. I made an edit request. could you please join the discussion as well? I really appreciate it if you join us. James.aminian (talk) 03:42, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Tabari refered to khwarizmi as almajousi. Which means zoroastrian. James.aminian (talk) 12:18, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 March 2025

Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi[note 1] (Persian: محمد بن موسى خوارزمی; c. 780 – c. 850), or simply al-Khwarizmi, was a Persian polymath who produced vastly influential works in mathematics, astronomy, and geography. Vkazemi (talk) 05:17, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. PianoDan (talk) 19:18, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

some eidtors disregard the etnicity and change it to something random.

the user is requesting to add protection on the etnicity in order to prevent random editors change it based on their opinion.

I believe editors who are familiar with this subject should first review the historical resources and decide about the exact introduction including the etnicity, name, etc and then add a protection. James.aminian (talk) 19:49, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Instead, we've protected it in a state that reflects actual site policy (MOS:ETHNICITY). Remsense ‥ 论 19:58, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

I do not understand why refering to him as Islamic scientist is relevant? it is like saying christian scientists or jewish scientists. plus according to the policy you provided here there should be a reference to his etnicity or country of origin. I do not see any of them here. James.aminian (talk) 23:17, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

No, because his ethnicity, to the degree it can be discerned going this far back, is not a key component of why he is notable. His status as one of the very most important figures of the Islamic Golden Age, working out of the Baghdad House of Wisdom is a key component though—beyond a shadow of a doubt. Remsense ‥ 论 23:46, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

"his ethnicity, to the degree it can be discerned going this far back, is not a key component of why he is notable." it feels like your personal opinion. most people do care about etnicity and country of origin. James.aminian (talk) 02:51, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Sure, and one of the things you learn studying history is that it's not remotely a fixed concept over time for anyone—and if you want to worry about opinions, the easiest and most harmful mistakes you can make are projecting your own sense of it backwards without even realizing all the assumptions you're making and imposing on historical actors.

FWIW, I'm not going to argue with you about the basic principles of ethnography (we're on an encyclopedia, go nuts)—I've given the explanation (which was already freely accessible in the talk page archives), in case you actually wanted to know why. Remsense ‥ 论 02:55, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 May 2025

	This discussion containing LLM-generated text from an AI chatbot or other tool has been collapsed. All editors are expected to express their views in their own words. LLM-generated arguments should be excluded from assessments of consensus.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Adding Persian ethnicity to the introduction: Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi[note 1] (Persian: محمد بن موسى خوارزمی; c. 780 – c. 850), or simply al-Khwarizmi, was a Persian polymath who produced vastly influential works in mathematics, astronomy, and geography. I am requesting that Al-Khwarizmi be consistently and prominently identified by his well-established Persian origin in the article's lead section, for instance, as a "Persian polymath." This is crucial for accuracy, consistency, and the proper representation of his historical identity. The reasons for this request are as follows: 1. **Overwhelming Scholarly Consensus:** The vast majority of reliable academic sources, including specialists in the history of science and mathematics, as well as other respected encyclopedic works, identify Al-Khwarizmi as Persian. Wikipedia's content must accurately reflect this broad scholarly consensus (WP:V, WP:RS). His Persian origin is not a minor detail but a foundational aspect of his biography as presented by historical scholarship. 2. **Standard for Historical Figures & Relevance to Notability:** Identifying key historical figures by their ethnic or national origin is standard encyclopedic practice, particularly when this origin is relevant to their notability and historical context, as per MOS:ETHNICITY. For example, Isaac Newton is described primarily as "English" and Carl Friedrich Gauss as "German" in their respective Wikipedia introductions. Al-Khwarizmi, a figure of immense significance in the history of science, warrants the same clarity regarding his Persian origin. 3. **Crucial Distinction: Ethnic Origin vs. Religious/Civilizational Context:** It is vital to distinguish Al-Khwarizmi's Persian ethnicity from his context as a scholar during the Islamic Golden Age and his personal faith as a Muslim. While his profound contributions to and within the Islamic civilization are undeniable and must be highlighted, describing him as a "Muslim scholar" or "scholar of the Islamic Golden Age" provides context for his work and faith, but it should not obscure or replace his primary ethnic identity. To illustrate: Isaac Newton is not primarily identified as a "Christian scientist," nor Albert Einstein as a "Jewish scientist," when their scientific roles are first introduced; their national/ethnic origins are typically given primacy in that descriptive context. Similarly, Al-Khwarizmi should be primarily identified by his origin as "Persian." His role as a Muslim scholar within the Islamic Golden Age is also key contextual information, but his Persian ethnicity is a distinct aspect of his personal heritage. 4. **Significance of Accurate Heritage Representation:** For many, including Iranians, Al-Khwarizmi is a figure of profound historical and cultural importance. To downplay, omit, or subsume his well-sourced Persian ethnic identifier under broader labels can be perceived as diminishing a nation's historical connection to such influential figures and is a disservice to accurate historical representation. Requested Action:** I request that the lead sentence of the article clearly and primarily identify Al-Khwarizmi by his Persian origin (e.g., "Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi was a Persian polymath..."). Following this primary identification, his significant role as a scholar working within the Islamic Golden Age and as a Muslim should, of course, be stated as crucial context. The objective is to ensure his Persian identity is stated unequivocally as his origin and not diluted. Thank you, James.aminian (talk) 03:38, 11 May 2025 (UTC)  Not done: It's already been explained to you that this matter has been discussed to death in the archives, including by the editors you think will agree with you because they have "Iran" in their username. Opening this as if it will magically make the existing consensus go away is willfully disruptive. (Also, please refrain from generating talk page arguments with an LLM. It's incredibly rude.) Remsense ‥ 论 03:44, 11 May 2025 (UTC) I'm not going to directly address your remarks, but you need to review wikipedia code of conducts. if this behavour continues I may request ANI. James.aminian (talk) 06:44, 11 May 2025 (UTC) It is to you to learn Wikipedia of conduct. Also, I fully agre with all Remsense's comments. By the way, I edited the lead to remove the qualificative "Islamic" before "mathematician" and replacing it by a link to Islamic Golden Age, which is clearly the main context for explaining the importance of al-Khwarizmi. D.Lazard (talk) 10:03, 11 May 2025 (UTC) Thank you for the latter point—I genuinely feel it now better represents the point I was making above. Remsense ‥ 论 11:29, 11 May 2025 (UTC) According to MOS:ETHNICITY, nationality should be included when relevant to notability. Since "Egyptian" is used for Abu Kamil without question, should we now remove it as well to stay consistent with the argument against "Persian" for Al-Khwarizmi? James.aminian (talk) 02:07, 12 May 2025 (UTC) Remsense comments that calls me with descriptive names like "go nuts" or calling me "rude" based on unproven claims like "enerating talk page arguments with an LLM. It's incredibly rude." You may be right in this case but this tone for communicating with some one who did not insult anyone here is very strange. And I also believe removing the ethnicity and country of origin is equivalent of ignoring a nation. James.aminian (talk) 01:18, 12 May 2025 (UTC) MOS:ETHNICITY says The opening paragraph should usually provide context for that which made the person notable. Clearly Al-Khwarizmi is notable for his writings and for his writings only. So, his ethnicity does not belong to the lead. Please, take it as a new answer to your edit request. D.Lazard (talk) 11:16, 12 May 2025 (UTC) One last question and I no longer going to send any request here. But please provide a reasonable answer. Why this MOS:Ethnicity rule that you are taking about only applies to Persian scientists from Islamic golden age? For instance as I mentioned in my other comment "Egyptian" is used for Abu Kamil. Why Wikipedia is ok with the Egyptian but not Persian. And also I’m not talking about the first paragraph, ethnicity and country of origin is completely removed from the entire article. James.aminian (talk) 18:40, 12 May 2025 (UTC) We're talking about this article, not that one. If another article is wrong in that it contravenes site policy, then it should be fixed. Remsense ‥ 论 05:18, 14 May 2025 (UTC)  Not done: as explained by others. M.Bitton (talk) 22:07, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

the lead paragraph misses the main points about khwarizmi.

Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi[note 1] (Arabic: محمد بن موسى الخوارزميّ; c. 780 – c. 850), or simply al-Khwarizmi, was a vastly influential mathematician from the Islamic Golden Age. He is recognized as a founding figure of algebra, and his influential treatise, Al-Kitab al-Mukhtasar fi Hisab al-Jabr wal-Muqabala ("The Compendious Book on Calculation by Completion and Balancing"), introduced systematic solutions of linear and quadratic equations. The term "algorithm" is derived from his name. Al-Khwarizmi also made significant contributions to astronomy and geography during his time at the House of Wisdom in Baghdad.

In this version, I included the two main reasons why he is famous: his book and the origin of the word "algorithm." The lead paragraph should highlight the main points for which a person is known. In this case, it is al-Khwarizmi's algorithmic methods and his book on algebra. James.aminian (talk) 03:53, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Putting in the first paragraph the reasons for which he is famous is a good idea. However the proposed formulation is too WP:TECHNICAL and misses some important points. Also, the last sentence would requre improvements, and the remainder of the lead must be adapted. For the first sentences, I would propose: Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi (Arabic: محمد بن موسى الخوارزميّ; c. 780 – c. 850), or simply al-Khwarizmi, was a vastly influential mathematician from the Islamic Golden Age. The word "algebra" is derived from the name of his fundamental treatise, al-Jabr. He popularized and improved the Hindu–Arabic numeral system, which became the presently universally used decimal system. The word "Algorithm" is derived from the Latinisation of his name.

However, more discussion is needed before changing the lead. D.Lazard (talk) 10:58, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. Given D. Lazard's response, I am marking this as responded-to as well. Pinchme123 (talk) 03:35, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

Khwarizmi's Origins are clear.

Not a day goes by without the gatekeepers of Wikipedia revising history related to Central Asian Iranians—shaping it to favor Turkic narratives, often at the expense of truth. This consistent erasure serves a broader agenda: to obscure the fact that Central Asia was once a flourishing heart of Iranian civilization, long before it was devastated and colonized by successive waves of Turkic and Mongol conquests. Despite overwhelming historical evidence—from Russian, British, Arab, Persian, Chinese, and Japanese sources—all of which describe the region and its inhabitants as Iranian in culture, language, and identity, there is a persistent rewriting of history. Wikipedia articles are regularly altered to accommodate political sensitivities, particularly avoiding any portrayal that might "offend" groups whose ancestors played major roles in the region's destruction. As a result, we now see pages where the Iranian roots of towering figures like Al-Khwarizmi are minimized or outright ignored. At times he is even labeled an Arab—until, inevitably, a Turko-Mongolic nationalist steps in to claim him as Turkic, simply because he was born in a region that Turkic people later came to occupy. This pattern of historical appropriation continues unabated, often without scholarly challenge, and leaves the legacy of genuine Iranian civilizations buried beneath layers of revisionism. 2607:FEA8:FC60:769A:2D1D:A0F4:3759:2702 (talk) 19:35, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

al-Khwarizmi's religion and language of his works

@Skitash: al-Khwarizmi's notability comes from his mathematical works, not because he was Muslim and/or wrote his books in Arabic (like all other scholars of that era by the way).---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:40, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

The lede doesn't state that he was Muslim; it says that he was a hugely influential figure of the Islamic Golden Age, which is a well-established historical fact. Skitash (talk) 14:44, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

Moreover, the fact that he was Muslim is attested by his own mathematical writings. So this is also a well established fact. D.Lazard (talk) 14:52, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

D.Lazard, interesting that you did answer me on your talk page, but you're writing here. Falka-Sol (talk) 15:46, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

It is intentionally that I did not answered to your last post on my talk page. It is because I have nothing relevant to Wikipedia to add to my first answer. Please, do not try to deduce hidden things from my writings. This goes against WP:Etiquette. Moreover, this indirect criticism may be viewed as a WP:personal attack. D.Lazard (talk) 17:08, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

WP:ETHNICITY is not about "well-established facts", al-Khwarizmi being a Persian is a "well-established fact", so should we include that in the lead ? I removed the Arabic language as per WP:LEAD.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:01, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

D.Lazard, so you have nothing relevant to add and explain why you removed my edit based on a guideline that clearly states it's about "most modern-day cases" (and even mentions "previous nationalities", (something that has only meanings in a modern context) after ethnicity), but you still oppose my edit? Falka-Sol (talk) 09:07, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

And all WP:ETHNICITY examples are modern figures! It's pretty obvious that it's in the context of modern nationalities, as there's then a section about "controversial or unclear cases", where it explains when people's nationality must be omitted. But virtually on all Iranian articles in common with Islam, it has been removed without anything being controversial or unclear. Falka-Sol (talk) 09:13, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

No, it does not apply to only modern figures. As I've mentioned to you twice, MOS:ETHNICITY opens with ""The opening paragraph should usually provide context for that which made the person notable." It also later says "Ethnicity, religion, or sexuality should generally not be in the lead unless relevant to the subject's notability." HistoryofIran (talk) 09:28, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

WP:POINTY tagging

@Wikaviani, we've had disagreements in the past, but I've always understood your reasons to some extent, and your arguments as being made in good faith. Suffice it to say, adding this {{cn}} tag to the lead sentence:

Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi [...] was a vastly influential mathematician from the Islamic Golden Age who produced Arabic-language works in mathematics, astronomy, and geography.

is not an edit I'm able to understand that way. Like I said, it's a flat-out disservice to our readers to state so prominently that a citation is needed when it incontrovertibly is not, for the most elementary facts concerning one of our most vital biographies.

Whatever disputes you have, I would prefer they be discussed plainly here instead, because I don't enjoy trying to discern whether veteran editors are grossly negligent in their highly visible edits to our most vital articles, or deliberately disrupting the encyclopedia to make some point abstrusely. You have shown too much acuity in our past discussions for me to think it could be the former here, so I'm at a loss. Remsense ‥ 论 08:23, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Hey Remsense, thank you for reaching out. I just stand by WP:LEAD that says that the lead's content should be detailed in the body of the article, which is not the case currently as the body does not say explicitly that al-Khwarizmi wrote only in Arabic. First I tried to remove that information from the lead, but I was reverted by an editor who suggested me to tag the information instead of removing it. I have always respected you as a valuable and knowledgeable editor and I am sorry to read your edit summary and the last part of your above comment where you seem to think that I'm "delberately disrupting the encyclopedia to make some point abstrusely", it seems to me that the respect I have for your work here, on Wikipedia, is not reciprocated and I am sincerely sorry about that. Please accept my apologies if my edits to this article were not clear enough. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:13, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

The lead doesn't say he wrote exclusively in Arabic either. Each element of the present statement is verified in the body multiple times over, I triple-checked. Remsense ‥ 论 09:14, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

I checked too, the lead says he produced Arabic-language works without leaving any room for doubt. Anyway, as I told you above, please accept my apologies if my edits here were not clear enough.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:18, 28 May 2025 (UTC)