User talk:Mann Mann: Difference between revisions

Archives

Archive 2012 Archive 2013 Archive 2014 Archive 2015 Archive 2016 Archive 2017 Archive 2018

who are you Wario-Man..?! why I can not edit a page and put the correct info? do you have any problem with fact? Aryan or Arian are Iranian people..this is a fact, and we are not proud of any race or gen. if you are racist and can not see that please let the others to hear the truth. do not play with history.

Clearly you are not familiar with Wikipedia rules and policies. Read my warning message on your talk page. Plus avoid personal attacks, nationalistic rants, and forum-like comments. --Wario-Man (talk) 14:14, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WM. I just reverted these edits by user:Cekli829.

a) he removed mention of "Persia" from the infobox
b) he added two irredentist pics ([1]-[2]) to a small subsection.
c) he didn't provide any reason/edit summary for these changes.

Curious for your opinion. - LouisAragon (talk) 02:03, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@LouisAragon:

a) Was it a part of Persia in that era? Since Persian/Iranian territory was variable during ancient and medieval eras, it's better to mention dynasty or kingdom who ruled that region during the life of Nizami. For example, see Al-Biruni.

b) We had similar issues on Nasir al-Din al-Tusi, a stamp. See its talk page for more info. If the used images promote irredentist claims, you can remove them.

c) When you encounter such edits and if the involved editors restore their edits, then open a section on talk page and ask them about their edits.
--Wario-Man (talk) 06:08, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

With these two edits,[3]-[4] you just (unintentionally) drew many "concerned editors" to this place.[5]-[6]-[7]-[8] - LouisAragon (talk) 14:05, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It has nothing to do with my edits. The language template was changed on this revision.[9] No reason to use a regional dialect/variant for a historical name. --Wario-Man (talk) 16:11, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mann Mann, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
• We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!

New Year Backlog Drive results:

• We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

General project update:

• ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
• Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

I added the correct item on the Iranian Ethnic List And you should not clean it. I myself am lak, and I know that the crowds in Iran are about 2.5 million. Please return me with what I edited Thanks Hadilak (talk) 23:36, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Hadilak: Unsourced changes will be reverted for sure. Read WP policies and guides. --Wario-Man (talk) 05:44, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Modu Chanyu's name is Mete in Turkish. This is a well known fact. He is also a prominent figure in Turkish history. Why does his page only have Chinese and Mongolian names? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masteryoda17 (talk • contribs) 20:48, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The same reason why we don't add his name in German, it's irrelevant. Xiongnu and its rulers have nothing to do with Turkish language. It does not matter what you call him in Turkish or how you view him in Turkey. Chinese and Mongolian are relevant because they are used in historical sources. --Wario-Man (talk) 04:36, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean it is irrelevant? Many academic sources claim that Xiongnu people were majorly Turkic. Modu Chanyu is seen as an ethnically Turkish ancestor. How do you know Xiongnu were related to Mongolian, but not Turkic people. In fact, Xiongnu were related to Turkic people more than Mongolians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masteryoda17 (talk • contribs) 06:05, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of Xiongnu is uncertain. Plus Turkic is not equal to Turkish language. You can't add Turkish language to articles just per that "Turkic" thing or your POV and personal analysis/opinion. As a new user, clearly you're not familiar with WP policies and guidelines. You better start reading them. My warning message has links to some of them. Also read WP:POV and WP:DISRUPT. Adding irrelevant languages to articles = POV, disruptive editing. Don't you agree with me? Go to Talk:Modu Chanyu, start a new section, provide your rationale and sources and discuss it with other editors. I may write my comment there. End of discussion. --Wario-Man (talk) 10:11, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi considering that you have warned me for being a ‘disruotuve’ editor. I would really appreciate it if you could read what I had written on my talk page and reply to me. I’m sorry to have to leave a message on your talk page.--Failosopher (talk) 07:50, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Failosopher: I don't read it because I have clarified everything for you and it seems you didn't get the point yet. Again: the problem is you have misunderstood that "Iranian" in the lead. Read it: Iranian peoples. You think it is only related to Iran and it's a nationality but it's an ethnolingustic term just like Germanic. It's sourced and based on citations while your addition "Afghan/Afghani" is just your very own personal opinion and some kind of nationalistic POV-pushing. What you did is irredentism + anachronism. You can't add your POV and personal analysis/interpretation to the articles. That's all. End of discussion. --Wario-Man (talk) 10:47, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Wario-Man: Please check the revisions. I completely agree that adding Afghani-Afghan is inappropriate. Let me assure you I did not make that revision. I simply added Parsis and Iranis (which are a community of Indian/Pakistani Zoroastrians to whom Nowruz is still important). The bit about Afghani peoples, was added in an edit by this IP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/184.151.222.124, in this edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nowruz&diff=831437507&oldid=831437273. This was done whilst I was in between revisions on the page so I can totally understand your confusion. Can we come to a compromise- I will make include Iranis and Parsis in the text once I have found appropriate sources for their inclusion. --Failosopher (talk) 21:00, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As to your edit summary yesterday on 'Afghanistan', while removing "Hindi" (in section Etymology), I'm wondering:

• what is "pov";
• why is "Hindi" 'pov';
• why did you remove 'Hindi' there?

--Corriebertus (talk) 16:09, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Corriebertus:

• WP:POV
• Read -stan, it has nothing to do with Hindi. It's a Persian suffix. An user added his personal opinion to the section etymology.[10] Wrong, irrelevant, unsourced, and pov addition. Consider this example: Someone edits Germany and adds a random language like Japanese to "Etymology". Don't you remove/revert their edit?
• Per 1 & 2

And I'm just wondering why my edit was odd for you. Is it because of my edit summary? Was it confusing or what? --Wario-Man (talk) 17:55, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Amigo/amiga,
'Odd', or rather questionable, because: (a) 'pov' is not an existing word in normal English outside Wikipedia (and should therefore nor be used here unless inevitable); (b) some Wikipedians seem to have built up a tradition to use 'pov' as (vague) reference to policy page WP:NPOV, but in the case at hand here I couldn't see any connection to the content or message or instruction on that policy page. We shouldn't too much copy the usage of tokens (like 'pov') from other Wikipedians if those tokens are not plain and normal English, are vague or unknown to readers, and/or are used incorrectly.
I'm further commenting on the (wrong) usage of 'pov' on another Talk page, not to be rude to you or to denounce you, but because the incorrect use of 'pov' to my opinion comes back often in Wikipedia, and perhaps it is good to discuss that matter with the wider Wikipedia community. See: Wikipedia talk:Neutral point of view#Incorrect usage of the term 'pov' or 'POV'. --Corriebertus (talk) 15:30, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you seem to be contributing to Iran-related pages, and I am wondering if you can share your views in this voting. The Template:People of Khorasan has been tagged by someone for deletion. I have challenged the decision here. The discussion is open for voting. Can you please give your views in this page? Thanks --Cabolitæ (talk) 16:02, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be a much more experienced Wikipedian than I am, so I was hoping you could look at, and respond to what I found in reference to the whole Tamga issue.

Best, Darokrithia (talk) 19:35, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK --Wario-Man (talk) 07:35, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Parthian Empire may be more prevalent in English sources, but that doesn't make it more accurate. Parthia was but a single region and never denoted the whole empire. Just like articles mentioning the Persian Empire should be corrected to the Iranian Empire to avoid confusion with the region Persia/Persis/Parsa (which it has gradually been in modern scholarship). The article about the Neo-Persian Empire is called the Sasanian Empire, so why not the Arsacid Empire? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andribuss (talk • contribs) 14:24, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:OR and take your concerns to Talk:Parthian Empire. --Wario-Man (talk) 19:15, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wario-Man, could you please comment on User talk:Monsore about Al-Biruni ? i spent hours explaining user:Monsore why we should write Iranian and not Persian in the article about the scholar, but he refuses to listen and keeps going on edit-warring. He says that Afghans have nothing to do with Iranians and denies any Iranian conquest of Afghanistan. Thanks. Best regards.---Wikaviani (talk) 19:45, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Biruni has nothing to do with Afghan and a modern country like Afghanistan. Since when a medieval scholar from Khwarezm has become Afghan?! If that user does it again, just report him to WP:ANI. --Wario-Man (talk) 20:03, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maid battleground comments treating Iranian historians of liars and many other disrespectful comments, could you please check his talk page and tell me if i should report him to ANI ? His last comment is : "i'll change the Iranian ethnicities in other articles and write "disputed" instead !" Thanks.---Wikaviani (talk) 20:15, 31 May 2018 (UTC)u[reply]

Then he's a WP:NOTHERE case. He does not want contribute to WP. Report him ANI and provide diffs and summary of his behavior. There is no reason to debate with a nationalistic troll. Admins should deal with him. --Wario-Man (talk) 20:20, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. I will report him right now. Best regards.---Wikaviani (talk) 20:24, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello dear Wario-Man,

I saw your message. I really did not want to insert something with less neutrality to Tajiks. I believe in Wikipedia philosophy and your neutral approach to issues. In the first version of "Tajiks", it had been written that "Tajiks are iranian people" that is not true. I did change it to " Tajiks are from Iranian origin". Iranian and Tajiks are two different nations.

Anyway, thank you for your considerations.

P. MoineddiniP. Moineddini (talk) 07:04, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@P. Moineddini: Have you clicked on that Iranian link to see what it is? It's not about Iran, it's about Iranian peoples which is an ethno-linguistic group. That's the reason why I reverted your edit because it was unnecessary. --Wario-Man (talk) 10:19, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In the article written that the Huns, Tuoba, and Xiongnu are unknown but may be of Turkic ancestry. scholars have suggested that the Avars could have spoken Turkic language. Good luck Amirxa (talk) 11:17, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No. Seems you didn't read Pannonian Avars carefully. It's about their language not origin. Speaking language X is not equal to being ethnic X. Article clearly says "were a group of Eurasian nomads of unknown origin", the rest is about their possible spoken languages. It's not similar to Huns, Tuoba, and Xiongnu cases, e.g. If you look at Xiongnu, there are sources about Proto-Turkic background of their ruling class while origin of Pannonian Avars is uncertain. --Wario-Man (talk) 09:02, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Look at this: The Avar Khaganate was a khanate established in Central Europe, specifically in the Pannonian Basin region, in 567 by the Avars, a nomadic people of uncertain origins and ethno-linguistic affiliation.[8][9] Several theories propose a partially Mongolic, Turkic or Tungusic origin. It's about origin not language. Amirxa (talk) 11:17, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just NO because: 1. We're talking about Pannonian Avars not their khaganate. 2. The changes was made by several IPs [11] by ignoring the main article about Pannonian Avars. The IPs cherry-picked info from main article and inserted them into the other article. I will restore NPOV revision again. --Wario-Man (talk) 05:24, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Read it again: avar Khaganate established in Central Europe, specifically in the Pannonian Basin region, in 567 by the Avars, a nomadic people of uncertain origins and ethno-linguistic affiliation.[8][9] Several theories propose a partially Mongolic, Turkic or Tungusic origin. 2.why you remove Content with source. You remove Content with source in merkit and Keraites.There is source to show they are Tukic. Why you remove it. First merkit khan name is tudur bilge and keraites khan name is Tughrul (These names probably have a Turkic root).you must writte all. Not what you like. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amirxa (talk • contribs) 16:26, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why you don't get it?! Clearly you don't understand what I wrote in the above comments and you're not familiar with WP guidelines and policies. I have clarified everything for you. Did you read my last message on your talk page?![12] Don't you see those stuff added by blocked sockmaster User:Joohnny braavoo1 and problematic IPs like 90.146.213.80. Trying to restoring sockpuppet's edits and starting POV-pushing = disruptive edits. Read WP:POV, WP:OR, and WP:WEIGHT. And don't write on my talk page again. Take your concerns to Talk:Turkic peoples. End of discussion. --Wario-Man (talk) 16:52, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

please check out rasulids page The Rasulids not only did they claim to be descendant from Jabalah, but habitually referred to themselves as Ghassanids.[9][10] https://books.google.com.sa/books?id=vSAtAQAAIAAJ&q=Rasulids+Ghassanids&dq=Rasulids+Ghassanids&hl=ar&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjbvKzntJvbAhWRyKQKHQIzAnE4ChDoAQgmMAQ/ https://books.google.com.sa/books?id=6KptAAAAMAAJ&q=Rasulids+Ghassanids&dq=Rasulids+Ghassanids&hl=ar&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwibprWusZvbAhUOZ1AKHZ_oCAYQ6AEIGTAB/ are these approvals as references?:/ Polar starr (talk) 17:34, 7 July 2018 (UTC) https://books.google.se/books?id=6KptAAAAMAAJ&q=Al-%27Asjad,+Sh.+%27Abd+al-Mun%27im,+pp.50-52&dq=Al-%27Asjad,+Sh.+%27Abd+al-Mun%27im,+pp.50-52&hl=sv&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiB1Y2Cwo3cAhWDPZoKHQnVCNoQ6AEIJzAAPolar starr (talk) 17:34, 7 July 2018 (UTC) The Islamic World: From Classical to Modern Times (Essays in Honor of Bernard Lewis), 1991, pp.332 I can not even find this bookPolar starr (talk) 17:34, 7 July 2018 (UTC) I also can not find Irfan Shahid who write about debunks the Turkmen Oghuz theoryPolar starr (talk) 18:17, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Polar starr:, restore the referenced information you have removed and take your concerns to the talk page.

• The Islamic World: From Classical to Modern Times (Essays in Honor of Bernard Lewis)
• Irfan Shahîd

Would appear you did not look very hard. --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:58, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

but many references point to Turkish origin! how are we going to solve this then?Polar starr (talk) 19:03, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think josef meri is worse than Irfan Shahîd if we are going to start namingPolar starr (talk) 19:08, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored the referenced information, removed Turkic from the lead, since it is contested, and removed sources that did not explicitly state Turk/Turkic/Turkman. Any concerns, then take them to the talk page. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:13, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The references still indicate that they are turkic,that's the most important thing? but anyway thank you for your timePolar starr (talk) 19:23, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And the other references state what??? Ghassanid ancestry. I would strongly suggest not simply searching for information that agrees with what you think/believe, but all the information concerning what ever subject you are editing. Else, you will be seen as a POV pusher. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:25, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See my comment here. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:47, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And compare their broken English to that of Sazz10 and Joohnny braavoo1.

• "If I've done the wrong change, then you can fix it if you want thanks" --Sazz10.
• "Hi you could help me on the page list of turkic dynasty someone is not willing to cooperate user beshogur Have also tried but no solution, Feels so unnecessary to discuss with this person because he does not approve of anythin and this person change ip adress istead of logg in" --Joohnny braavoo1
• "This is the first time I'm in Wikipedia,If you think I've been blocked before, I would chang on every page that this person did not like --Polar starr

Thoughts? --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:11, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I thought Johnny Bravo ended many years ago. That's odd...[13] - LouisAragon (talk) 22:28, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Kansas Bear and LouisAragon: He's just another obvious WP:DUCK of Joohnny braavoo1 (talk · contribs). And no, he's active and that's the reason why List of Turkic dynasties and countries is extended-protected until 2018-08. I see LouisAragon has submitted a SPI case. I write my comment there. Thanks for notification. --Wario-Man (talk) 06:00, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was meant to be sarcastic. Haha - LouisAragon (talk) 14:57, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You might be interested.[14] - LouisAragon (talk) 17:35, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@LouisAragon:, another one?[15] Your thoughts, Wario-Man?--Kansas Bear (talk) 14:46, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's him. How a new editor appeared on both Rasulid dynasty and Al-Ashraf Umar II just after the blocking the sockpuppet? I'll report him. --Wario-Man (talk) 08:11, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I support my edits with references, and now it is believed that Al-Magar civilization was the first civilization to tame horses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by هارون الرشيد العربي (talk • contribs) 12:32, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@هارون الرشيد العربي: See Domestication of the horse. Take your concerns to Talk:Domestication of the horse. --Wario-Man (talk) 12:39, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is not about coroners, It is something about East and West. — Preceding unsigned comment added by هارون الرشيد العربي (talk • contribs) 13:01, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What?! Don't you see my above comment? Your edit was irrelevant to article Kazakhstan and it has nothing to do with that article. If you think that sentence "Archaeologists believe that humans first domesticated the horse (i.e. ponies) in the region's vast steppes." is wrong, you should prove it on Talk:Domestication of the horse. Your claim belong there and that article already supports steppe origin for domestication of the horse. End of discussion. --Wario-Man (talk) 13:28, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org. Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. (Purge)

Hello Mann Mann, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

June backlog drive

Overall the June backlog drive was a success, reducing the last 3,000 or so to below 500. However, as expected, 90% of the patrolling was done by less than 10% of reviewers.
Since the drive closed, the backlog has begun to rise sharply again and is back up to nearly 1,400 already. Please help reduce this total and keep it from raising further by reviewing some articles each day.

New technology, new rules

• New features are shortly going to be added to the Special:NewPagesFeed which include a list of drafts for review, OTRS flags for COPYVIO, and more granular filter preferences. More details can be found at this page.
• Probationary permissions: Now that PERM has been configured to allow expiry dates to all minor user rights, new NPR flag holders may sometimes be limited in the first instance to 6 months during which their work will be assessed for both quality and quantity of their reviews. This will allow admins to accord the right in borderline cases rather than make a flat out rejection.
• Current reviewers who have had the flag for longer than 6 months but have not used the permissions since they were granted will have the flag removed, but may still request to have it granted again in the future, subject to the same probationary period, if they wish to become an active reviewer.

Editathons

• Editathons will continue through August. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

The Signpost

• The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team here.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 00:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be so kind as to read over User:Kansas Bear/Persian wars of Constantius II? I would appreciate your perspective. If you need an idea of what was changed, read Persian wars of Constantius II. Thank you. --Kansas Bear (talk) 01:34, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Kansas Bear: You want to rewrite the whole article? --Wario-Man (talk) 12:02, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have rewrote the entire article. Have you read the current version, which uses Gibbon almost exclusively as a source?--Kansas Bear (talk) 15:14, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is our sources for Rouran Khaganate(source [4]): Encyclopedia of the Peoples of Asia and Oceania https://books.google.com/books?id=pCiNqFj3MQsC&pg=PA687#v=onepage&q&f=false

This is photo from page 678 (writte about Rouran Khaganate) :

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Origin_of_Rouran_Khaganate.jpg Some sources state that they were proto-Mongols who spoke an early form of the Mongol language, while others ascribe Turkic origin them. Louisol (talk) 17:13, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Louisol: Hi. The author is a social anthropologist so I doubt it passes as a reliable source for history. Let me ask other editors about it by opening a section on WP:RSN. --Wario-Man (talk) 07:00, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Look at page of Jalairs. It's written on this page: "Jalair is one of the Darliqin Mongol tribes according to Rashid-al-Din Hamadani's Jami' al-tawarikh." But that's wrong.Darliqin Mongol(مغول درلکین) tribes according to Rashid-al-Din Hamadani's Jami' al-tawarikh are this tribe (From page 147 to 182) : http://uupload.ir/files/6kjb_darlikin_mongols_147_-_182.png

And writte about Jalair tribe (from page 65-73):در ذکر اقوامی از اتراک که ایشان را این زمان مغول می گویند

Persian text translation: "In mentioning the of Turkic peoples , who called them Mogul at this time."

(Jami' al-tawarikh page 65) http://uupload.ir/files/trl_jalair_65_-_73.png

Sorry I did not have access to the English source. I used the Persian source. But I highlighted the important parts and I gave you the page numbers.

And even René Grousset (in "The Empire of the Steppes: A History of Central Asia" page 194) and Yury Zuev (in "Early Turks: Essays on history and ideology", page 104-105) said that the jalairs have Turkic origin. Good luck.Louisol (talk) 17:13, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, #1 is a primary source and WP:OR. #2 (René Grousset) does not say they had Turkic origin but says: "The Jelair tribe... may have been a Turkic tribe..." Plus, is Jelair = Jalair? #3 is in Russian and it does not seem a WP:RS. See [16]. Find better sources. I ask another editor's opinion about your sources. So wait. --Wario-Man (talk) 07:34, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is Louisol the same as Limbozz? Appears to be the same argument. --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:46, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About #3:yes you right

About #2:The first part of your text is right "The Jelair tribe... may" jalairs may have Turkic origin.

But the second part of your text is wrong if you see Grousset written "Jelair" It's because of language. Look at this:just because of" َ " and " ِ "

(جِلایر= Jelair) (جَلایر=jalairs)

Or

(عَرب=Arab) (عِرب=Erab)

Even Uzbeks call jalairs as" Jaloyir" https://uz.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaloyirlar

About #1:It's not WP:OR. These two photos are taken from the main book of Jami' al-tawarikh in persian language. and not belong to me. If you have access to the English version of Jami' al-tawarikh's book. Give me the link to show you the Content. Sorry that my description was long. Good luck

Louisol (talk) 17:23, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• "..similar relationships to the Ilkhanids: both families were descended from Mongol tribes (the Jalayirids and the Sulduz.." -- Kingship and Ideology in the Islamic and Mongol Worlds, Anne F. Broadbridge, Page 156.
• "The Jalayirids probably first appear in the mid-thirteenth century as one of the Mongol tribes making up Hulegu's army." -- The Persians, Gene R. Garthwaite, Page 154.
• "Arghun Aqa, a Mongol Administrator A Mongol from the Oirat tribe, Arghun Aqa was born c. 1210 and at an early age entered the service of the Jalayirid (Jalayir Mongol tribe) emir Qadan. -- Genghis Khan and Mongol Rule, George Lane, Page 101.
• "Jalayirids Mongol dynasty in Iraq (Mesopotamia), western Iran, and Azerbaijan 1336-1432, -- Islam: art and architecture, Markus Hattstein, ‎Peter Delius, Page 615.
• "THE JALAYIRIDS The name Jalayir is derived from that of a large and important Mongol tribe." -- The Cambridge History of Iran: The Timurid and Safavid periods, William Bayne Fisher, page 5. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:37, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Kansas Bear, it would be great if you add them to Jalairs and Jalairid Sultanate. @Louisol: As you see, their Mongol background is supported by various sources. Compare those mentioned references with yours. That's all. --Wario-Man (talk) 11:54, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Natalie Grant - Natalie Grant (album cover).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:49, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Natalie Grant - Stronger (album cover).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:40, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

	The Special Barnstar
	For all the times you helped me, here on Wikipedia. You told me about Twinkle, you helped me to better understand what a reliable source is, you corrected many of my numerous (alas) erroneous edits, etc ... the list is long and i don't want to bother you further with it. So, to make it short : THANK YOU my friend. Take care. ---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 21:07, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wow... Many thanks for this. Cheers! --Wario-Man (talk) 14:23, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As with most articles of this nature(ie. List-articles, X-ethnicity Templates), they are frequented/infested by POV pushers who are not here to build an encyclopedia or here to spread the TRUTH!! Granted there are list-articles that are not of a POV nature, List of battles involving the Ghaznavid Empire or the soon(hopefully) to be List of battles involving the Seljuk Empire. Best just to let the insecure POV pushers have their little template(s)/list-article(s) until they hang themselves(ie. don't get drawn into edit wars with them). --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:51, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]