Talk:List of Hazara tribes
Page contents not supported in other languages.
| Skip to table of contents |
| This is thetalk page for discussing improvements to theList of Hazara tribes article. This isnot a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies |
| Find sources: Google (books ·news ·scholar ·free images ·WP refs) ·FENS ·JSTOR ·TWL |
 | This article is ratedList-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
there is no relation between the Hazara tribe of Afghanistan and the Tanolis of the Hazara region in Pakistan.— Precedingunsigned comment added byAdilkhantanoli (talk •contribs)02:44, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually this is not strictly true. The Tanolis of Hazara region og Pakhtunkhwa are divided into many groups: the people of Tanawal who were alreaday in that area before the arrival of Tanaolies from across the Indus River i.e. Mahaban Mountains. These people came to be called Tanoli purely because they are resident in the areas later to be known as Tanawal - the origin of these people is mixed i.e. Awans, Abbassis, Gujjars etc. Second come the ruling tribe and those who came with them being a collection of tribes and clans originating in Turkic, Mughals, Afghans and Hazaras from Ghazni and regions contigous to it.It must be remembered that along with Swatis the Tanaolies crossed the Indus and unseated the ruling elite of Karlugh Turks, a Turkic/Hazara people. Some of these people stayed and were Pashtunised and are now within the fold of Pashtun tribal structure. Those people who identify themselves with Tanoli surname, in Hazara as well as in Karachi, are in fact not part of Tanaoli background but of original Hindki people without link to thje great Tanaoli tribes who are Afghans and resident in Hazara, Ghazni, northeastern Iran etc. and known as Tani, Taniwal, Tanavoli, Daulatzais etc.Moarrikh (talk)13:41, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The list is wrong, that is what i think. How can it be that Hazaras are descendants and comprise of EVERY clan of the Turks and Mongols? Logic defies this. The Turks of Afghanistan remain as Turks in the form of Uzbek, Moghol, etc, and do not consider themselves Hazara. How can the Hazara constitute of such tribes like the Keraites and Tatars who never came to this region? And speaking of Karluks, they went to India with the armies of Babur, or mixed with the local Pashtuns and were forgotten by history (as it goes in my family history).Grape khan (talk)12:46, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links onList of Hazara tribes. Please take a moment to reviewmy edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored byInternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template{{source check}}(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot(Report bug)12:38, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Removing sources is against theWP:RS,WP:CONS &WP: WAR rules. AccordingWP:RSPRIMARY, "Wikipedia articles should be based mainly on reliable secondary sources, i.e., a document or recording that relates or discusses information originally presented elsewhere". "All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source, rather than original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors". No need to change Mongolian origin to Turkic. According to the prominent turkologistBalkis Karmysheva "there are no special studies, reasonable statements, giving grounds to dispute the Mongolian origin of the Barlas" (in original: "нет ни специальных исследований, ни более обоснованного высказывания, дающих основание оспаривать монгольское происхождение барласов")[1]. According to the orientalistIlya Petrushevsky, the term Turks in Persian sources has not so much ethnic as social and everyday character. The Turks in Persian sources can mean both Mongol-speaking and even Tibetan cattle-breeding tribes. According to him: "It can be argued, with a high degree of probability, that the barlas were Mongol-speaking, and not Türkic-speaking" (in original: "Можно утверждать, с большой долей вероятности, относительно ряда племен — татар, кераитов, найманов, джалаиров, сулдузов, барласов, меркитов, ойратов, — что в XIII в. они были монголоязычны, а не тюркоязычны")[2].--KoizumiBS (talk)21:42, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
References
Is it complete list?--Kaiyr (talk)19:10, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Basharatdihinda please don't start anedit war and follow the rules described inWP:NPV andWP:CONS. The information you remove has links to sources. Removing text without explanation is a gross violation of the rules. If you continue to delete information without a reasoned explanation, I will be forced to contact the administrators.--KoizumiBS (talk)18:17, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No complete genetic research has been performed on all Hazaras and their tribes.--Hamkar 99 (talk)19:39, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot agree to the deletion of information from reliable sources. Such changes are in violation of the rules prescribed inWP:NPV.--KoizumiBS (talk)20:11, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
References
I removed the section about the racial origin of the Hazaras, because this is just a list of the Hazara tribes, not research on their racial roots. The ethnic origin of the Hazara people consists of several relatives. That's why it's better to remind the list of Hazara tribes here.Jasoorth (talk)18:26, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hakaped, please note that the text you removed included sources. Deleting the text may be considered a violation of the rules described inWP:NPOV. The sources cited in the article meet the criteria outlined inWP:RS (David O. Morgan, Michal Biran, William E. Henthorn, Alton S. Donnelly, and others). According to Morgan "Qara meaning black in Mongolian and Turkic", according to Donnelly "Batyr comes from the Mongolian word "batur", meaning hero". All sources are cited in the article with page numbers and quotes provided.KoizumiBS (talk)02:21, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Qara Batur andQara Baghi are the Turkic form, but in Mongolic they are in the form of "Khar Baatar" and "Khar baghi", which does not exist in Hazara. In Hazara, are only the Turkic forms "Qara Batur" or "Qara Baghi".[1][2]Hakaped (talk)21:09, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.svg)
