Category talk:Kurdistan
From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
[edit] Talk page
There are apparently some issues with this category. This is what a talk page is for. This is evidently a controversial topic...everyone should keep a level head and an open mind and we'll be able to come to some agreement as to what belongs in this category, and what doesn't. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass demandez 14:39, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- I feel it is not aproporate to treat Kurdistan like a regular uncontraversial region. Kurdistan is a confusing term with multiple meanings both political and cultural depending on the source. I so far assumed this was about the lesser controversial cultural region. Lets establish what we want from it
- Politically:
- Kurdistan exists but is restricted to 3 Iraqi provinces at northern Iraq known officially as Kurdistan and semi-officially as Iraqi Kurdistan (due to confusion over the geo-cultural area). We can base it on this and treat it like an Iraqi state as it is recognized as one. Kurdistan started existing as of 2004 I believe with the ratification of the new Iraqi constitution.
- Kordestan is an Iranian province that has nothing to do with Kurdistan. This entity should be beyond the scope of this category and be treated as yet another Iranian province.
- Anywhere else of Iraq Kurdistan, Kurdistan does not exist as a political entity defacto or not.
- Culturally:
- Kurdistan is a geo-cultural area where "Kurds traditionally lived". Since Kurds are/were nomadic people, the boundaries of this area is not defined, most sources claim it is in the middle east somewhere. There is no agreement on the actual borders.
- --Cat out 14:56, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- Politically:
If we have it flagged as a disputed territory, why not include all the countries that might possibly have part of a hypothetical Kurd homeland? I would think that Turkey, Syria and Iran all have at least some content there? I don't think I want to get too deep into this conflict but that's my thinking. I just walked the revision history and I am completely at a loss as to why there is so much revision, proposal for deletion, etc. I think some rational discussion here is needed, and perhaps some mediation, by someone or some set of someones that doesn't have anything emotionally invested in the tensions of the region. ++Lar: t/c 15:06, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Right now this cat is only in the cat "Government of Iraq". I would assume that it would go without saying that most people looking for media related to Kurdistan would not navigate to "Government of Iraq" looking for it. I suggest using the same cat scheme as en:, which includes Kurdistan in a few Geography cats and in the Disputed Territory cat. There's no reason to politicise this -- just do the thing that makes the media easy, or intuitive, to find. We're not the UN, nothing we do here will make a difference in these people's political status, we're just a media repository. Jkelly 17:26, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- I would oppose the en scheme as it is quite bad out there. The category is used in a political manner there.
- Kurdistan is a vague term. It can have many meanings. When you have a highly controversial term with multiple meanings, it will always be political and there is no escaping it. However if we decide on a solid inclusion criteria, this will be much easier to deal with on the long run. That way we can avoid the polirics.
- If the intention is to make media finding easier and if the intention is to make media related to Kurdish people in general, Kurdish people cat is fine for that and it would be neutral too. After all anything that appears in this cat is relevant to Kurdish people one way or another.
- We are not the UN thats quite right, we are neither advocates of Kurdish independence movement, nor judges on what falls inside of Kurdistan and what doesn't. I think it is best to limit that kind of discussion on what we are and what we aren't.
- --Cat out 17:37, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
(unindent) We now have Category:Maps of Kurdish-inhabited regions and Category:Maps of Iraqi Kurdistan. I moved the images in the "Maps of Kurdistan" category to those 2 categories. The news media today uses "Kurdistan" to refer to w:Iraqi Kurdistan. See this Sept. 2, 2007 Chicago Tribune article:
"Kurdistan is working," said Ashti Hawrami, the Kurdistan Regional Government's minister of oil and gas. "If we sit down and do nothing we are not doing our job. We are doing our job for the country."
So I think this category breakdown is clearer for the average reader of wikipedia and the news. And it avoids the confusion surrounding the old and new meanings of Kurdistan. See the geography section of w:Kurdistan. I believe wikipedia is supposed to lean toward the common names today.--Timeshifter 17:45, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
