Talk:Assyrian naming dispute
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 | Assyrian naming dispute is currently a Culture, sociology and psychology good article nominee. Nominated by PresentlySuraye3 (talk) at 23:08, 9 March 2026 (UTC) This article is ready to be reviewed in accordance with the good article criteria. Any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article may review the article and decide if it should be listed as a good article. To start the review process, click start review and then save the page. See the instructions.
|
 | The use of the contentious topics procedure has been authorised by the community for pages related to Assyrian, Chaldean, Aramean, and Syriac identity, culture, and politics, including this page. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned. |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
.svg){kind=small}
 | A fact from Assyrian naming dispute appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 5 April 2026 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
Did you know nomination
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. You can locate your hook here. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:48, 30 March 2026 (UTC)
- ... that differing perceptions on identity amongst Assyrians have dominated internal community discourse for several decades?
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Archion
- Comment: Supported information is on pages 239-240, the first two pages of Makko's chapter
PresentlySuraye3 (talk) 17:10, 24 February 2026 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
|---|
|
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
Article was created from a redirect on the day of nomination. I recognize that this is probably a controversial subject so best to watch it and possibly protect it when it goes up. However, the review you listed as a QPQ seems to be incomplete as you did not fill out the status field. May you please fix this? TheBritinator (talk) 15:56, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- @PresentlySuraye3: Pinging for visibility. TheBritinator (talk) 15:56, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- TheBritinator I finished the review and marked the status field as "y." It should be good now. PresentlySuraye3 (talk) 16:32, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you. Good to go. TheBritinator (talk) 16:43, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- TheBritinator I finished the review and marked the status field as "y." It should be good now. PresentlySuraye3 (talk) 16:32, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
ISBN
PresentlySuraye3: Did a somewhat quick spot check on some of the ISBNs, and this one seems to be wrong or does not exist: ISBN 9781463239961. --Gurkubondinn (talk) 17:59, 24 February 2026 (UTC)
- @Gurkubondinn Thanks for pointing that out, I just went ahead and changed it. The new ISBN was found here and should hopefully lead to the book in question. PresentlySuraye3 (talk) 18:29, 24 February 2026 (UTC)
Feedback from New Page Review process
I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Looks very expansive good work.
TheBritinator (talk) 02:03, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
"Counterarguments"
Neutrality
'Chaldean: Within the Chaldean Catholic Church, some members will declare a wholly Chaldean identity that is ethnically separate from Assyrians. Additional claims, albeit in the minority, include that Chaldean Catholics descend from southern Iraq and the former ancient civilization state of Chaldea. The label is most prominent among Iraqi Assyrian communities.'
Doesn't calling them 'Iraqi Assyrian' entail taking a side in the dispute, given that they, as far as I understand, reject the label 'Assyrian' for themselves? Anonymous44 (talk) 06:32, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
- As stated under "Patterns of identity," the debate for Chaldean identity is
today mostly an Iraqi phenomenon and lacks saturation among the larger Chaldean Catholic community, including church members from Bohtan and Urmia.
I grant this is somewhat an understudied topic, but considering that Chaldean Catholics from Turkey and Iran are open with their Assyrian background (not all Iraqi Chaldean Catholics reject their Assyrian background either), and the development of a separate Chaldean identity only began as a result of the Simele massacre, the way it is written in the lead as of now is a fair description overall. PresentlySuraye3 (talk) 11:22, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
- AFAIU, you're basically saying that we are taking a side in the dispute, but we are right to do so, because one side in the dispute is 'wrong', namely - the Chaldeans who do not identify as Assyrian are 'wrong' not do do so. My impression was that the article was trying to be neutral in this dispute, which I think is the most reasonable approach. Of course, if you can prove that most scholars say that the Chaldeans are 'wrong', then the article will be justified in saying that, too. IMO, many, if not most scholars would recognise that such identity issues are not among those in which you can be 'wrong' - and that all the facts you listed are irrelevant for that reason.--Anonymous44 (talk) 17:17, 5 May 2026 (UTC)