Talk:Laki language

These Wiki articles on the Laki dialect

These Wiki articles on the Laki dialect are dominated by individual propaganda, personal ideology, fantasy, and personal agendas. Many of the individuals who are dominating these articles are attempting to re-write history and portray a false imago of the Laki tribe. In reality, the Laks are very different and share a very different history from what is said about them here on these webpages. Unfortunately, these people have nothing but time on there hands, while the rest of us do not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lakestan (talk • contribs) 11:32, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Laki is not a Persian dialect

It's definitely more ancient than Farsi is !

weblog

please do not use weblogs in external link sections, thanks--Pejman47 09:01, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello Every one I think Laki ia a language just as Farsi and Kurdi. I had found Words that are originaly in Old Persian(Parsie_e Bastan) that have different forms in Farsi ,Kurdi and Luri. for example you can compare the word An( means that) in Farsi with Luri ,Kurdi, Laki and Old Persian counterparts.

80.191.228.199 10:31, 2 July 2007 (UTC) Arash Nadri

Wikipedia' Unreliablity

Laki Language and articles the like which are based on nothing outside of personal ideas of various virtual individuals, have made Wikipedia a simply-at-hand source to skim materials rather than an adequately reliable scientific source. This, let alone causing socio-ethnic tensions in particular cases, is why scholars and peoples who seek reliable information, regard Wikipedia not seriously in practice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.219.138.247 (talk) 13:05, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Then perhaps you should do something about it instead of talking and spreading misconceptions. Yes everyone knows that scholars don't seek their info on Wikipedia, it would be foolish to do so, however it is a good place to start. And quite frankly, obscure articles like this are prone to be subjected to vandalism, as very few are watching them. If it causes socio-ethnic tensions then perhaps that is because people are gullible enough to trust what is said on pages like these and to not second-guess the sources. Wikipedia has never been, and will probably never be a reliable scientific source. Scientists seek knowledge from Actual sources. Now that we have that settled, perhaps you should become a member and try to improve instead of disproportionately pointing out the obvious flaws of Wikipedia. DukeTwicep (talk) 11:28, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Laki language

Laki is an absolute language. Its may have some words of very ancient Persian language (avesta) and kurdish, but it has thousands of words that you can't find in other languages. Laki is the native language of some cities of Iran (like delfan) and some cites of Iraq. It means one language in two different country so it's not persian. Its not Luri! It vastly is different from Luri, but it has some common points with Kurdish but Laki absolutely is not a dialect of Kurdish!

Dialect instead of language

We should definitely change this article from being a language to a dialect, either a Persian or a Kurdish. I personally think it's a Persian one, but does anyone have scientific evidence for that? (Or even Kurdish) — Preceding unsigned comment added by LouisAragon (talk • contribs) 23:23, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Ethnic Kurds speak more than just one language. The article says that Laki is a Kurdish language. --JorisvS (talk) 13:02, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

That's true that ethnic Kurds speak at least three linguistically distinct-however closely related-languages (namely Kirmanji, a.k.a Kurdish; Gorani; and Zaza, a.k.a Kirmanjki, Dimilki, Kirdki). Even the actual linguistic diversity and more importantly the religious differences (most Zaza speakers following Alevi sect which is considered a heretic creed by Muslim Kurds or Leki and many Southern Kurdish speakers following Shiite Islam contrary to the Sunnite Sorani speaking Kurds around them) have ushered into the emergence of new ethnic identities such as "Zaza" or "Leki" (though these brand new ethnic identities might not embrace the whole entire Zaza or Leki speaking Kurds), beginning in the very past century. While people are absolutely but free to profess their identity, but it must not turn into a pretext to distort facts-either historical or scientific ones.

So in this particular case, Leki, one must bear in mind that regardless of the significant number of Leki speakers (mainly in the Lorestan province of Iran) considering themselves either "Leki" or even "Lur", but not Kurd; Leki, as a whole, is a dialect of Kurdish (those introduced with linguistics acknowledge that transitional dialects, such as Pishekuhi Leki, which only carry lexical contamination caused by the adjacent Lurri subdialects are no good reason to exclude Leki from Kurdish).

Dr. H. Rezai Baghbidi, a preeminent Iranian dialectologist, explicitly considers Leki as a Kurdish dialect belonging to the Southern Kurdish group (source: Dialectology, Journal of the Iranian Academy of Persian Language and Literature; Vol. 3, No. 1,2 2006-2007).

I think for the sake of scientific reliability it is best to change the title from Leki Language to Leki Dialect.--Kak_Language 14:28, 14 August 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kak Language (talk • contribs)

Title:Laki Kurdish

Since Laki is not really a "language" but a variety of Kurdish (because this article itself, RS, Ethnologue, and the Kurdish languages articles all unanimously say so), it should have a title consistent with other Kurdish articles, i.e. Northern Kurdish, Southern Kurdish, and Central Kurdish. Also, the title should be easily distinguishable from Lak language which is an independent Northeast Caucasian language, not a dialect like Laki. I think we should move this article to "Laki Kurdish" as per these reasons. What do other editors think? Khestwol (talk) 02:08, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

@Khestwol: your suggestion is reasonable, but maybe you can take a look at last edits. According to user:Shadegan, it's not a Kurdish dialect anymore :)--Gomada (talk) 17:15, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Laki is a dialect of Lurish language not Kurdish

Dear free Encyclopedia users, as it is evident and I referred to its corresponding references and literature, Laki is and has been an integral part of Lurish community. For decades the title Kurd has attributed to Iranian nomads from total Iran plateau. This phrase included Persian, Lurish and other Iranian nomads. In case of Lurish people, due to significant similarities and interrelationships they were claimed several times by Kurdish separatists to be a branch of so-called Greater Kurdistan. This claim was not welcomed by Lurish community. Then they tried to attach the regions with more similarities. Lak people are the closest part of Lurish community to their Kurdish adjacents. During history, they always have been a part of Luristan, for example Ilam province was known as Poshtkuh Luristan. As well, in 1976 A.D due to their ethnic affiliations and interests, heft of Laki inhabitant regions of Kermanshah province were appended to Luristan province. I do not deny significant similarities between these two ethnic groups, but historical and routine evidences confirm their Lurish identity. --Shadegan (talk) 07:36, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Please, stop to falsify realities with your POV.--Gomada (talk) 16:37, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

No sir you're the one that's falsifying reality, Laki is not a Lurrish dialect. PisheKuh Laks have been "lurified" through decades of exposure and proximity to the Lurrs, but the Laks are historically Kurdish and share many roots with Kurdish tribes. The linguistic studies done on Laks are biased, they were conducted with consideration of a very small sub-population of pisheKuh Laks whose dialect had been greatly influenced by Lurrs. If they were to do this same analysis on PoshteKuh Laks you would see that Kermanshahi Kurdi and Laki are very very close. Most Laks don't even understand Lurri. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lakestan (talk • contribs) 03:45, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

POV-push and reliability of sources

Hello, please look at this and this edits of user:Shadegan. It's important to look at sources. For example, the user:Shadegan added , Erik John Anonby as a so-called source which supports Laki belongs to Luri language. But if you read pages 19 and 20, you can see a comparison of Pish-e Kuh Laki with Kurdish and Luri. After that the author says: Pish-e Kuh Laki is aligned with Kurdish rather than Luri. This is distortion of information. User:Shadegan is also adding some persian sources which can not be checked/proved. Thanks.--Gomada (talk) 14:04, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Another falsifying from User:Shadegan. The source says:Fayli (Faylee, Faili, or Feli) Kurds are, as their name tells, an inseparable segment of the Kurdish population in Iraq and an integral part of the Kurdish nation, which is divided among many countries in the Middle East, mainly Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey. Fayli Kurds have themselves shown, over the years, and still show this fact and reality by words and deeds. They speak a dialect that belongs to the southern Kurdish dialect called Luri which is spoken in the southern areas of Kurdistan proper, particularly on both sides of the border areas between Iraq and Iran. And the user:Shadegan is using this source as a proof of so called Lur identity. Who will stop this vandalism?--Gomada (talk) 11:45, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

POV-push and Large-scale vandalism effort by user: Gomada

As it was asked by English Wikipedia administrators, I provided some authentic and valid references for Lurish Identity of Feyli Lurs in two edited pages. As you can see in the history of these pages the user User:Gomada has changed and removed these logical and authentic edits. As an old user of Wikipedia I think some users have imagined and counted this invaluable and useful encyclopedia as a farce and mischief area to distort the realities and promote their ethnocentric and ambitious aims. I hope Wikipedia adminstrators and other realistic users help to stop and prevent such inappropriate vandalism efforts.--Shadegan (talk) 13:53, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Stop your personal attack and show us the mention of Feyli Lurish and Laki Lurish in sources. Where? As I mentioned above, you are falsifying sources.--Gomada (talk) 15:44, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

As everyone can see and trace, there are good and authentic citations and sources mentioned in the page. Don't forget you're not an administrator of English Wikipedia , thus you don't have any authority to remove well-documented citations and edits. Your question in talk page is not related to these edits. Know your right and limits and stop vandalism efforts.--Shadegan (talk) 19:33, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

unreliable and fake sources

Ethnologue classified this language as ad branch of Kurdish and corrected it's mistake in archive.when the new version correct a thing then the old version is not reliable. Hamid Izadpanah was a poet and researcher of local Lurish music and he was not a linguist. Sekandar Amanollahi mentioned The Luri dialect is closer to Persian while Laki is closer to Kurdish. and other sources are fake. other sources are fake. --– Hossein Iran « talk » 00:05, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

'Other sources are fake' is not really an argument. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:36, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

confirm, a lot of sources in this article are unreliable or misinterpreted, we have the same problem with this article in Persian(fa) Wikipedia.DEXi (talk) 04:36, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

International Encyclopedia of Linguistics: AAVE-Esperanto. Vol. 1 page 310 did not tell anything about Laki language. it is about Chinese language. --– Hossein Iran « talk » 10:02, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

So that's 2-3 out of 7 sources. --HistoryofIran (talk) 11:07, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran: 2 and 8 are same and also 4 and 5 are same and also i explained about other sources. – Hossein Iran « talk » 08:31, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Quite sure that 2 and 8 are not the same [1]. --HistoryofIran (talk) 10:19, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran: both of them are from Ethnologue and Ethnologue corrected that mistake and classified Laki as a branch of Kurdish here Laki in ethnologue. and in Persian Wikipedia users talked adequate about those sources and they were omitted from article. --– Hossein Iran « talk » 15:08, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Do what you want, not interested in digging further into this. --HistoryofIran (talk) 00:04, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran: so please do not revert sources. i omitted them from Persian Wikipedia but vandal user tries to make vandalism in other Wikipedias after failure in vandalism in Persiann Wikipedia. there i have adequate accesses and other Admins are protecting related articles but unfortunately in English Wikipedia Admins are not Iranian and they do not have any information about the topic. thank you. --– Hossein Iran « talk » 17:39, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

@Hosseiniran:: I haven't really reverted anything though. HistoryofIran (talk)

Requested move 26 May 2019

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. There is consensus against this requested move. (closed by non-admin page mover) qedk (t 桜 c) 12:19, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

---

Laki language → Laki Kurdish – Laki is not a language (at least 7 academic sources confirming that in the article). User HistoryofIran has reverted by move twice now thinking he owns the page. So, I'm making a request here since the current title is very misleading. It is a Kurdish dialect (see intro of the page) which only makes in natural for it to be named Laki Kurdish. Looking at the history of the talkpage, it is very clear that this page has had a big POV-problem. --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 00:30, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose; Lol no, I reverted you because you suddenly changed the established and most common variant of a name (along with many other article names). Yes indeed it has had a big problem, which you are clearly not helping with. What is Laki then? An intrustment? Heck, even the sources you use contradict you [2] [3]. If you can prove that the language (yes, language, crazy right?) is not universally known as "Laki (language)", then I will retract my opposal. --HistoryofIran (talk) 01:34, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Both those sources state very clearly that Laki is a Kurdish dialect. --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 01:41, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

”Classification:Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Kurdish” --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 01:45, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

What...? What has that to do with anything? Let me make it more clear for you then; If you can prove that the language is universally known as "Laki KURDISH" instead of "Laki (language)", then I will retract my opposal. For the 3rd time, I'm not denying that its Kurdish (frankly, in contrast to you, I couldn't care less). --HistoryofIran (talk) 01:55, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Why are you so keen on having a misleading name? How can you not see that recognizing that Laki is a Kurdish dialect (opposed to a fourth Kurdish language beside Sorani, Kurmanji and Xwarig) disqualifies it as a language. And stop assuming things. This is second time you assume things. --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 02:02, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

It literally says in the two sources above that it is a language. Also I'm not assuming anything, stop trying to focus on me rather than the subject, it's immature and doesn't strengthen your argument one bit. Btw you still haven't come up with anything. --HistoryofIran (talk) 11:29, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose [4], which is cited as a part of this move, doesn't claim that this is a dialect of Kurdish. Instead it says "Pish-e Kuh Laki is thus more closely related to Kurdish than to the Luri languages", which is quite different than calling it a dialect of Kurdish. Nor am I seeing that independent sources are calling it a dialect of Kurdish on a regular basis. Hobit (talk) 09:57, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

@Hobit: Academia tend to use dialect and language as synonyms when it comes to Kurdish.
For example, Iranica Online[5] writes: "Moreover, Oskar Mann had rightly found that the difference between Laki and other southern Kurdish dialects to be only minor (“nur unwesentlich”; Mann, p. xxiii). Therefore, he puts Laki along with other south Kurdish dialects under the general rubric “Laki” (Mann, p. xxvii). " but they also wrote: "The main ethnic marker of the Lak is their language called “Laki.".
Linguist Anonby furthermore writes: "Most linguists classify Laki within Kurdish, although it is unclear whether it is best classified as a separate of branch Kurdish (as shown here) or as a variety of Southern Kurdish."[6] --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 10:08, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm not even requesting the name of title to be Laki dialect, but Laki Kurdish which really should not be an issue. --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 10:08, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

OK, but as far as I can tell, its common name is Laki, not "Laki Kurdish". Per WP:COMMONNAME that's what matters. Hobit (talk) 10:12, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Fair enough but I stand by the issue I have with 'language' which is misleading. If its not an issue, I believe the article should be renamed Laki. --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 10:19, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

It is generally considered to be a language. I agree some good sources call it a dialect. But that's not how it is commonly thought about or discussed. So while I have less strong thoughts on that, I still think it's in a better place now. Hobit (talk) 10:24, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Consistency becomes a problem then, since the introduction clearly lay the ground for it to be understood as a dialect. The other Kurdish dialects, Kurmanji, Sorani and Southern Kurdish don't have the word 'language' in their title either (which would also very odd and uncommon way of describing them). --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 11:21, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

That's because you changed it including lots of other stuff without any form for discussion. You're welcome to change some of it back. --HistoryofIran (talk) 11:33, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

You mean the years' old unsourced sections[7], deadlinks[8] and the unverifiable sources[9]? --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 11:36, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

No, I was referring to the part where you removed Laki being mentioned as language. --HistoryofIran (talk) 11:39, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

If I have removed academic and reliable sources, you should rea-dd them instead of insinuating stuff. Two of the three sources I removed that argued that Laki was an independent language were dead and the third one even describe Laki as a 'The Laki dialect continuum'[10]. --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 11:49, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm good; not interested in trying to clean up for you just so you can revert me and accuse me of pov-pushing again. --HistoryofIran (talk) 12:02, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose, the current name is more helpful for readers. And it is also disputed if it is a part of Kurdish or not. We don’t need POV here. Coron Arol (talk) 02:49, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose, as you see in the undeviated page, there are lots of debates over Laki, some cnsidered it as an Independent language, some as a Lurish variant and some as Kurdish variant. At least the name of the page should be comprehensive. SHADEGAN (talk) 12:10, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
• Comment: Laki-Kurdish ≠ Laki? according to this source

*Laki-Kurdish

• • Kurdish
  • Laki

So does that mean Laki-Kurdish is the parent language for both Kurdish language and Laki language?--SharabSalam (talk) 12:37, 4 June 2019 (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.

Discuss instead of revert

@Shadegan:, what do you mean by " Ethnocentric edits"? Please, use the talkpage to improve the article. --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 12:13, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

@Shadegan: @Ahmedo Semsurî: I would suggest that both of you guys stop reverting each other and discuss calmly here on the talk page. Thanks.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:46, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

@Shadegan:, you can start by explaining how it is pan-kurdism and why you keep reverting to a version which was a mess with many problems? --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 15:03, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Dear @HistoryofIran:, a planned ethnocentric edit series are done n pages Feyli Lurs, Laki language, Laks and Iraqi Lurs to revert their identityto the desires and wishes of some ethnocentric users. Please have a look to their trends. SHADEGAN (talk) 15:27, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Shadegan, could you please elaborate ? how are these edits "ethnocentrists" ? Is there a problem with the source provided ? Please clarify.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:39, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

@Wikaviani:, @HistoryofIran:, @LouisAragon: Excuse me for my late and using some inappropriate phrases by me, as you can see in the edit history, all pages related to Lurish people have been under mass invasion to change their background and identity towards an inappropriate ethnic conflict. You can have a look to the recent edit history of pages: Lurs, Feyli Lurs, Iraqi Lurs, Lak people, Laki language, Southern Lurs, History of the Lurs to find their catastrophic edits. Unfortunately, there are not Lurish users in the English wikipedia to demonstrate the facts butI wonder how some users are doing everything in such a bad way?!! I expect you to help to clarify the facts as you are involved in Iranian topics in English wikipedia. BestSHADEGAN (talk) 13:02, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

What sources do you have a problem with? --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 13:09, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

There's also a discussion here Talk:Iraqi_Lurs#Interation_of_the_page_in_Feyli_Lurs, but Shadegan still doesn't explain the issues existing with the sources. --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 13:11, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Since no action has been taking, I've decided to add needed templates for dead links and unattainable references. --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 10:42, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Ethnicity

Sorry, but i remember when i always check on kurdish wikipedia, laks were described as ethnic kurds and now after i checked today it says they are ethnic laks?? Since when? We have too many laks from zand tribe who says themselves they are kurds, according to others scholars they’ve always been kurds, even some historical famous kurds in 20th century were laki speaker from zand tribe, laki comes from kurdish to southern kurdish dialects 185.187.78.149 (talk) 12:57, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

It has now been changed back. Semsûrî (talk) 12:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC)