Misplaced Pages

Talk:Tajiks: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 19:15, 15 July 2015 editElspamo4 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users16,530 edits Who should be included in the infobox and why← Previous edit Latest revision as of 16:10, 8 January 2025 edit undo2607:fea8:fc60:7c5a:70de:693c:977a:97e (talk) Eastern Iranian: ReplyTag: Reply 
(332 intermediate revisions by 71 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{oldafdfull| date = 23 July 2011 (UTC) | result = '''speedy keep''' | page = Tajik people }} {{oldafdfull| date = 23 July 2011 (UTC) | result = '''speedy keep''' | page = Tajik people }}
{{Talk header|noarchives=yes|search=no}} {{Talk header|noarchives=yes|search=no}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|1=
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject Ethnic groups|class=Start|importance=High}} {{WikiProject Ethnic groups|class=Start|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Central Asia|class=B|importance=high}} {{WikiProject Afghanistan|importance=top}}
{{WikiProject Afghanistan|class=B|importance=low}} {{WikiProject Tajikistan|importance=top}}
{{WikiProject Tajikistan|class=B|importance=low}} {{WikiProject Central Asia|Uzbekistan=yes |importance=Top |attention=| Uzbekistan-importance=Top}}
{{WP Pakistan|class=B|importance=low}} {{WikiProject Iran|importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject Zoroastrianism|class=B|importance=low}} {{WikiProject China|importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject Pakistan|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Zoroastrianism|importance=mid}}
}} }}
{{Backwardscopy {{Backwardscopy
Line 14: Line 16:
|title = Demography of Afghanistan: Afghanistan, history of Afghanistan, Afghan (name), Pashtun people, Tājik people |title = Demography of Afghanistan: Afghanistan, history of Afghanistan, Afghan (name), Pashtun people, Tājik people
|org = Alphascript Publishing |org = Alphascript Publishing
|comments = {{OCLC|502359870}}, ISBN 9786130061432. |comments = {{OCLC|502359870}}, {{ISBN|9786130061432}}.
|bot=LivingBot |bot=LivingBot
}} }}
{{archives | bot=MiszaBot | age=90}} {{archives | bot=MiszaBot | age=100}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|algo=old(90d) |algo=old(100d)
|archive=Talk:Tajiks/Archive %(counter)d |archive=Talk:Tajiks/Archive %(counter)d
|counter=1 |counter=3
|maxarchivesize=100K |maxarchivesize=100K
|archiveheader={{Automatic archive navigator}} |archiveheader={{Automatic archive navigator}}
|minthreadsleft=4 |minthreadsleft=1
|minthreadstoarchive=1 |minthreadstoarchive=1
}} }}


== Sunni islam should be made explicit in the info box please, not just islam ==
== Gender imbalance in the infobox ==


Sunni islam should be made explicit in the info box please, not just islam
The infobox presents 25 famous Tajiks, selected at random. The gender imbalance is quite scandalous as there are 23 men and only 2 women. I'd move that at least 1/3 should be women, there really is no reason to push such a strong gender imbalance, so 5-6 men could be replaced by 5-6 Tajik women.] (]) 14:34, 13 October 2014 (UTC)


== We should make a modern era section. ==
They are not even Tajiks. Eg - Ferdowsi's birthplace is located in Iran and he wrote in Persian. ] (]) 18:18, 21 December 2014 (UTC)


The current history section in this page just talks about the origins of Tajiks. We should make a modern era section, that many other ethnic group pages already have. Tajiks have had plenty of history in the USSR, Soviet-Afghan War, Afghan civil war, and the current situation in Afghanistan right now.
This is true, many of the people in the gallery image are not tajiks. ] (]) 09:40, 17 February 2015 (UTC)Akmal94


== Problem in gallery and request for this article to be moved == == Semi-protected edit request on 26 November 2024 ==


{{Edit semi-protected|Tajiks|answered=yes}}
A lot of people in the image gallery are represented as Tajiks while this is not true. Ferodwsi was born in Iran, therefore he could not have been Tajik. Secondly Rabia Balkhi was of Arab descent therefore she could not have been of Tajik descent either. Lastly, why is Muhammad of Ghori included in the gallery of Tajiks? He was not a Tajik, the ghorids themselves were believed to be Pashtuns and they were NOT native speakers of the Persian language but rather patronizers of the culture. There seems to be a lot of vandalism and propaganda being posted by Tajiks here themselves with no evidence being provided. I also request the Tajik article to be moved to the "Persian People" article as a sub-category to erase confusion of Tajiks being a separate group.
] (]) 13:44, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
Uzbekistans goverment did’t estimate that numbers as 2 to 11 million Tajiks in Uzbekistan. You should put that to the estimate of Richard Foltz. Richard Foltz linked as source to this page told us that he believes that there are between 6 to 11 million Tajiks in Uzbekistan. You changed the numbers please put it back to previous. If Uzbekistans government estimated that as 2 to 11 million please share us sources.
:] '''Not done''': it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a ] and provide a ] if appropriate.<!-- Template:ESp --> ] (]) 17:27, 27 November 2024 (UTC)


== Extinction of Eastern Iranian Languages. ==
] (]) 09:39, 17 February 2015 (UTC)Akmal94


Only little of the Extinction of Eastern Iranian languages should ever be attributed to "The spread of the Persian Language" as using this idea to answer the question of "why in the world many of these people speak persian who arent persian but a mixture of iranians" is dangerous and neglects the years of genocide that the region of Central Asia has lived through
:{{re|Akmal94}} Agreed, the current gallery is very problematic. Many Persians are mistakenly being portrayed as 'ethnic Tajiks' in an entirely anachronistic manner in order to perpetuate a Tajik ethnogenesis. Most of these subjects are only referred to as Tajik in the propagandist literature which was mass produced by 20th-century Tajik nationalists. Even if they were historically referred to as Tajik, it had an ''entirely'' different meaning in the past. It was used solely to refer to Arabs and Iranian converts to Islam . See for information on how the modern-day state of Tajikistan attempts to claim virtually all Iranian peoples as ethnic Tajiks irregardless of whether they lived in Central Asia or not.


Just like the parts of China which once was inhabited with Scythians and other Iranian peoples(whether genetic differences are or arent it doesn't matter as in a general sense they were Iranians)We can conclude that these regions were colonized by Turks and Mongols who formed two groups
:The article referenced on this very page has some interesting information pertaining to this:
<blockquote>"The modern meaning of “Tajik” has been distorted in Tajik-language and Russian academic usage (both Soviet and post-Soviet) by the propaganda of the complementary agendas of Soviet nationalities policy and Tajik nationalism In most scholarly writing on Persian literature and cultural history (of Iran and India as well as Central Asia) the adjective is usually construed as “Perso-Tajik” or “Tajik-Persian” poetry, historiography, etc., in an atopical and anachronistic application of the national ethnonym to the entire Persianate world "</blockquote>


1.The fleeing Turks
:I'm going to go ahead and remove all of the purported 'Tajiks' whom have no references to their supposed ethnicity on their article pages. The allusion to the ] on this article are also troubling . ] (]) 05:01, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
2.The colonizing Turko-Mongolians


1.The fleeing Turks
*{{Ping|Akmal94}} The procedure for requesting moving a page is set forth at ]. What you appear to be suggesting is a merger of this article into the article entitled ]. See ] and ]. If you choose to continue, please be sure that usage on both templates points to the same place for discussion. If you are serious it would also be appropriate to give notice of the merger discussion at ], ], ], ], ], ], and perhaps ] and ]. --] (]) 20:34, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
These turks being the people who ran away from Mongolians during the Mongolian Plundering of Central Asia and settled as "immigrants"
::A user tried to again restore all the medieval Persians and Chorasmians etc into infobox to claim them as Tajiks on Misplaced Pages. They were not Tajiks so I reverted him. ] (]) 14:28, 8 July 2015 (UTC)


2.The subsequent Colonization of Central Asia
{{collapse top|title=Extended off-topic discussion on who is edit-warring and who should provide sources}}
These Mongolians and Turks who colonized these lands after destroying its native inhabitants and reducing them to modern day Tajikistan and Afghanistans Borders.
I'm afraid I fail to see what the issue is here. Whether there are references or not to an individual being Tajik in the WP article is irrelevant, as WP is not ]. Ethnicity galleries are not usually sourced, but of course we should not add nonsense. However, none of the two users who repeatedly have blanket deleted have provided any real reason (and no, saying "o references to their supposed ethnicity on their article pages" is not a reason). Kindly provide relevant arguments for each individual you want to remove and then '''wait for the discussion to end''' instead of the recent edit warring you have engaged in.] (]) 19:13, 8 July 2015 (UTC)


Now, how does this answer what i was referring to of course, as to what lead to the eastern iranians speaking "Farsi" as a language, well i ask you?
:{{re|Jeppiz}} You have completely misinterpreted and mischaracterized the entire situation. You may want to read ] to refine your understandings of what an edit war is. This page is certainly not under ] restrictions and this issue has been discussed and agreed upon by myself and ] (directly above your comment nonetheless) prior to my removal. There have been zero objections raised on this talk page until you accused me(?) of edit-warring. "Ethnicity galleries are not usually sourced" is not an argument. This is irrelevant, as I am not referring to the sourcing of the gallery itself, but of the subjects who appear in the gallery. It would be a violation of ] to purport these figures as "Tajik" on their own page ''or any other page'' without providing a single source. In case you forgot what this policy entails, allow me refresh your memory:
When your people , land and cities are burned and your people mostly wouldve understood two languages one being universal to your people " due to the the ancient empire of Iranshar and Arabian Islamic Empire, which wouldve incentivized Learning Farsi as that was the language that was close to the lands in which the capital of the islamic empire was established among Iranians as the language to use to get economical and social benefits in the courts of Baghdad" And when your nations and lands and cities of cultures are turned into nothing but rubble and stone (but of course this isnt genocide because Genghis khan was a good man who allowed religious freedom throughout his tolerent empire) tell me, if you had 200 bactrians, 100 khwarazmians, 200 sogdians and these people all fled to lets say kabul, and they spoke two languages one native to there lands and the other being Farsi, wouldve these people had the opportunity to bother saving there languages if the lives of there sons, daughters, mothers, brothers, sisters, and other relatives were underthreat? Would've they been worried about preserving there languages or wouldve they chosen the most convenient thing and making the best of the situation they had to survive in as little as possible, wouldve they preferred to become entirely Turkic or adopted another Iranian language that secured there bloodline is some manner if not the other?
<blockquote>All material in Misplaced Pages mainspace, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable. All quotations, and any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material. Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed.</blockquote>
:If you have an actual argument for why these images should persist, please present it. Otherwise, you might want to re-consider your reversion and faulty accusation. The previous two editors who have reverted me and ] did not take it upon themselves to use the talk page to discuss my or Akmal's reservations, and neither have you. I have provided a clear and concise argument for why these images should not appear in the gallery and have supported it with sources and Misplaced Pages policies. ] (]) 19:47, 8 July 2015 (UTC)


Please understand that i dont have any intentions here besides to have a civil debate on this topic as it would be very important to ask why did coincidentally many genocides in history was committed by certain groups against only certain groups. ] (]) 15:47, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
::{{re|Elspamo4}} Unfortunately you misrepresent the situation, and I see that ] has reverted once again, and as usual without providing any reason.
::*First, you are both most certainly edit warring. You seem to confuse things and believe that only a violation of 3RR is edit warring. That is not the case. You make an edit, you're reverted, but you still redo it, well, you're edit warring. You ask me to read ], and I will ask you to do the same. You might learn already from the introduction ''"An editor who repeatedly restores his or her preferred version is edit warring regardless of whether their edits were justifiable: 'but my edits were right, so it wasn't edit warring' is no defense"''. So yes, both ] and ] are actively involved in edit warring.
::*Second, if you want to change the article, the '''onus is on you''' to explain why. I already asked you to do this, by providing a reason for why you feel any given individual should be removed.
::I have not said you're wrong, I've simply pointed out that your edit warring is wrong. It's entirely possible a good argument can be made for your preferred version, but it's up to you to make it.] (]) 21:33, 8 July 2015 (UTC)


:I can add further for my "hypothesis" here of why Turkization, (where it was Absolute gencoide and integration of a few remaining remnents of the Iranian peoples to turkic societies) might've had been mores successful than other regions of greator Iran, well to answer this we can look at two parts of iran that was changed , Iraq and Central Asia, where these lands where changed, iraq to arabia and Central Asia to Turkic
:::{{re|Jeppiz}} My argument is not simply "my edits were right". To put it more accurately, there has been absolutely no attempt at discussion by the reverting editors or even a hint of why they reverted besides an edit summary by ] calling my removal 'vandalism'. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt on this since there is a possibility that they didn't see the talk page as I forgot to leave an edit summary explaining my removal. However, this doesn't justify their re-addition of outright bogus material.
:The thing we can assume that allowed such an event to take place couldve been that Turks and mongols were closer to central asia Before as compared to the time they "migrated" from parts of mongolia to Central Asia(during the white hun and heptalite time periods) where there presence couldve been present but not spread out as it is today as it seems turks only seems to have been able to carve empires out of places where they lived and inhabitant and not places that had different ethnic groups because unlike the tolerant empire of iran created by Cyrus which respected other peoples, it turns out people dont like it when you wish to "erase" them from history.
{{collapse bottom}}
:We could use the reasoning above to understand why turkization of Central asia was successful as the land was
:::I won't ask you to read all of my arguments, since you're probably not interested in Tajiks, but do me a favor and read the articles of some of the more notable people purported as Tajik on this article, such as ], ] or ]. You will not find a single mention of "Tajik" on their article pages. I searched for books in an attempt to prove a possibility of their ethnicity being Tajik and I couldn't find any sources which claim this to be the case. Hence, I removed them from this page. This was done per the policy: "Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed". Removing unreferenced and unproven information is not edit warring. You said it yourself: "of course we should not add nonsense". Adding Khwarizmi or Avicenna to the gallery is not any less nonsensical than adding, say, Obama or Will Ferrel. There is no justification for labeling any of these people as "Tajik" because there are no references, on or off Misplaced Pages, which stake this claim. Thus, the onus is on the people who wish to re-add the pictures to at least find some sort of reference purporting these peoples' Tajik ethnicity and plaster it on their article pages. I have no obligation to find a source which argues against their Tajik ethnicity; trying to do so would be attempting to prove a negative. I really don't see how any sort of a consensus would be required to remove ludicrously inaccurate and unreferenced matieral, even in ethnicity galleries. ] (]) 22:08, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
:1.Now closer to the steppe lands that turks controlled, hence giving them advantages for moving , unlike before where it wouldbe been guarded
:2.The destruction of central asia, providing new opportunities for turks to move and settle to central Asia, which also occured twice, once with Genghis and other time with Timurlame
:(Timurs intelligence here is undermined as he didnt "beatify" Samarkand as city that his ancestors destroyed because he was in love of the arts and crafts but because it wouldve been a good opportunity to finally give a foothold to turks to access iran(which succeeded because iranians in iran got more susceptible to raids, plunders and gradual colinization of iran by Turkic tribes which partly was also stopped by Turks themselves, ironically.) ] (]) 16:07, 10 December 2024 (UTC)


== Origins of the Tajiks ==
::::{{re|Elspamo4}} I'm sure you agree I cannot be held responsible for what ] wrote, and while I don't agree with the edit warring, I'm the first to agree that you're certainly not a vandal, and that your edits are made in good faith. However, your arguments are very poor. You say it is no less nonsensical to add Obama than to add Avicenna. Pardon me, but that is where you lose ''all'' credibility. Avicenna spoke and wrote the language that would develop into modern Tajik (and modern Persian), he was born in a city that both then and now was/is populated by what became ethnic Tajiks. If you think that that is comparable to Obama or Will Ferrel being Tajiks, well, I'm afraid you either lack rudimentary knowledge or you really cannot present a case. Your tiresome insistence that it is "ludicrously inaccurate" material is rather empty. Both your silly comparison with Obama and your sweeping generalizations only serve to highlight that you appear to have no '''factual''' arguments.] (]) 22:45, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
:::::I agree with {{u|Elspamo4}}. {{tq|"Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed"}}. Many of the nonsense additions were Medieval Persians, besides a ], and a ]-speaker (i.e. ]). Reliable sources don't consider them Tajiks. We can add only those figures to the gallery who are unncontroversially Tajiks. ] (]) 23:01, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
:::::I agree that we should only add figures who are uncontroversially Tajiks. Deducing that Avicenna is Tajik because he was born in a city which was populated by 'what became Tajiks' is pure OR and anachronic. I also don't see how speaking '''Persian''' and '''Arabic''' makes him Tajik. Please find a '''reliable source''' which claims he is Tajik. Keep in mind that the ethnicity of historical figures are a hotly debated issue; Avicenna has been claimed by ''multiple'' ethnic groups. The only literature that claims he is Tajik is state propaganda. I also think you completely misunderstand the context in which Tajik was used in historical times. It certainly wasn't an ethnonym in Avicenna's time. ] (])


I'm adding the full list of origins and possible origins for the Tajiks from both Tajikistan and Afghanistan. I have added citations, and evidence. Tajiks are a mixed group, they are not actually Persians, but they are their own unique group with their own amazing history, at the same level as Persians. Again they are MIXED. They also have some Greek ancestry due to the Greek conquests of Central Asia. The Greeks and Macedonians lived in Bactria in Tajikistan and northern Afghanistan. Have a look at the people referred to as Dayuan in the citations and internal link I added. I believe in honesty. So make sure you understand what true history is, and not make up your own stories. Thanks. ] (]) 05:06, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
>I also think you completely misunderstand the context in which Tajik was used in historical times. It certainly wasn't an ethnonym in Avicenna's time.
are you uneducated or what? The term tajik was most certainly used during his time - the word tajik is literally a synonym for persian, one is a greek term and one is a turkic term all for the same farsi/parsi speakers - avicenna was born in the samanid empire, to say he was not a persian/tajik is fallacious. Mad vandalism. <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 04:19, 11 July 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


:Do you have references that back up your claims? DNA test results on research papers etc? As far as I know, their closest group (pashtuns) don't have greek admixture beyond a few haplogroups according to latest research ] (]) 11:03, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
:Stop accusing me of vandalism. No one is saying he was not Persian. That still does not make him Tajik. Tajik is a specific sub-group of Persian people, not the other way around. Unless you are able to find a ] stating very clearly that he was a part of this particular ethnic sub-group, and place it on the articles of the people you claim are 'Tajik', I see little benefit of continuing this discussion. And, for the last time, ''place of birth is not a determinant of ethnicity''. Doubly so when you try to apply this faulty logic in such an anachronistic manner. ] (]) 04:48, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
::replying to what Leopardus said, Tajiks even though they cant be considered "greek" they can be considered descendents of Greco-Bactrians considering that many of there tradition's, cultures and values came from the greeks but it was a mix of the region, the most important thing to Leopardus62 right now should be acknowledging that many histories of tajiks have been lost with the Mongolian genocide of our regions, tajiks could be descendants of a number of the lost eastern iranian tribes, but nonetheless i do think , us tajiks reserve the right to distinguish ourselves from Persians of iran who say we speak "dari"(an insult term to undermine the language we speak , but we understand) and "Pashtuns" who call themselves
:The ] page doesn't seem to have any 5th century Persians in their ethnicity gallery. All of the people listed as Uzbek have '''SOURCES''' in their articles supporting this view. So please stop re-adding nonsense state propaganda to this page. ] (]) 04:57, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
::Descendents of Israelites,
::And are also closely tied to the region of the india, where ironically more pashtuns live in Pakistan outside of "Afghanistan" than the region they claim to.
::Still the time i would assume has come for Tajiks, to either they integrate to Pashtun societies or iranian ones, or make one of there own, we cannot let our lives be dictated by corrupt warlords who only think about there own pockets or Pashtuns who wish to change us into there own culture or iranians who consider us alien to themselves and consider themselves "European"(lol)
::I do believe tajiks are a unique people that are stuck in a war that they shouldn't be a part of (rule of the majority in afghanistan forces the tajiks to fight for pashtuns and there wars thus putting them in a really hard situation as they have nothing to gain and everything to lose) ] (]) 19:21, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
::I don't need to show you, of all people, DNA results proving Greek descent. Furthermore it is extremely difficult and largely impossible to pinpoint Greek descent with DNA haplogroups. It's mainly guess work. I have actually studied Genetics at university to know this. Also, no actual studies have conclusively proven that Pashtuns have Greek descent. A lot these studies that are used for Pashtuns are statistical and speculative. The only actual evidence comes from archeology.
::So understand that archeology and historical evidence is also evidence used to justify descent and relations. The Macedonians and Greeks heavily colonized and ruled the area of Northern Afghanistan and Tajikistan, which was called Bactria. Tajiks are native to Northern Afghanistan and Tajikistan (i.e. Bactria). Southern Afghanistan was not Bactria. Also, Bactria was very Greek after that time. The Greco-Bactrian kingdom is an important part of the history of Tajiks. Go read about the Dayuan people, who were related to the Greco-Bactrians, mentioned by ancient historians.
::Also, Pashtuns are not originally from northern Afghanistan or Bactria. Look up the article titled 'Pashtun colonization of northern Afghanistan'. Pashtuns did not live in northern Afghanistan or Bactria, and only recently, in the last 200 years, did they reach northern Afghanistan. In addition, MANY ethnicities in Afghanistan have Greek descent, not just Pashtuns.
::Therefore, please research and read the required works regarding historical evidence and archeology (which I have done a lot), and understand that you don't own this article. It is a communal and collaborative work. Don't disrupt the improvement of the article, and take out good information that is usually included in other important Misplaced Pages articles. ] (]) 04:41, 21 December 2024 (UTC)


== Eastern Iranian ==
*{{Reply|Scytsari}} I know Tajiks are Central Asian Persians, and Tajik is a synonym for Persian-speaking groups. But using Tajik instead of Persian is anachronism and original research. You need historical sources or reliable references to use Tajik as an identity for medieval Persians/Iranians of Central Asia. Why? Because the definition of modern ethnic group Tajik may be confusing and you need to clarify its medieval usage as an ethnic identity. Try ] . If you provide reliable sources, nobody will remove them from the infobox again. We can't use our very own interpretation of the sources. For example, if a source says "X was a Persian...", we should only use "Persian", not Iranian/Afghan/Tajik/. --] (]) 06:57, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
The article incorrectly claims that Tajiks are "Eastern Iranian." This is factually inaccurate, as "Eastern Iranian" is a linguistic classification and cannot be applied to Tajiks, who are native speakers of Persian—a Western Iranian language. Ancestry (or presumed ancestry) is irrelevant when using precise linguistic terminology. Both Hazaras and Tajiks are, by definition, "Western Iranian peoples" and belong to the broader Persian linguistic and cultural group. All Persian dialects, including Hazaragi and the Tajik dialects of Tajikistan, are more closely related to Kurdish and Tati than to Pashto or Ossetian. Notably, Ossetian is spoken in the outer northwest of the Iranian linguistic world but is still classified as "Eastern Iranian." <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 01:14, 3 January 2025 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


:not true, while Tajiks might have among them many Native Persians that would've migrated and settled in those lands, there bloodlines are more in line with the Eastern Iranians than that of Western Iranians, they have genetic similarity with the Pashtuns, yaghnobis, Pamiris and the rest. ] (]) 16:10, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
>That still does not make him Tajik. Tajik is a specific sub-group of Persian people, not the other way around
Again, demonstrating you have no idea what you're talking about, I advise you to go to iranica or any other source and educate yourself on the term "tajik", it's etymology, when it was used, why it was used and who it refers to. Even up until the 1800s german sources referred to farsi speaking iranians in iran as tajiks. <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:49, 11 July 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:As juicy and enlightening reading through this discussion was, it seems like some users do not like our staunch edits. Granted, we have no agenda here, all we are trying to do is clear up confusion which can mislead others who may come and read this article. However, 3 people here including me, Khestwol and Elspamo4 have agreed that the current gallery is very problematic and misleading. None of these people can be seen as "Tajiks" because the term "Tajik" was not used for a single ethnic group until the soviet era which even then had a negative notion with inhabitants of Tajikistan. Why forget that the term was used specifically to Arabs in the past? Does that mean Ibn Sina was Arab then? Its just as silly to add a portrait of Kaniskha in the Pashtun People gallery just because he happened to be from their region because the term Afghan was not applied later. We can only add pictures of people in modern times who accept and seem themselves as Tajik rather then past figures which can be seen as controversial. Furthermore it seems like past edit has once again been reverted by an unknown user with no reason being given. ] (]) 14:09, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

===Who should be included in the infobox and why===
OK, a lot of discussion has been made above about the content of the infobox, but none of the discussion was ''productive'' because no one provided any ] for their claims. Let's try to make some productive discussion. As I understand, certain editors ({{U|Elspamo4}}, {{U|Akmal94}}) claim that some images should be removed from the infobox (namely, images of ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ] and ]). The reason provided for the removal is that those persons were not Tajiks. Whether that is correct or not, I don't know. But, indeed, the article does not cite any reliable sources to prove that hey were Tajiks. So, {{U|Elspamo4}} removed those images as they present unreferenced information (). That was perfectly correct thing to do: unreferenced material that is suspected to be wrong should be removed until the source is found. After that, some editors (i.e. {{U|Jeppiz}}) reinstated the images () claiming that "there is no consensus to delete". That was the wrong step. We don't need consensus to remove unsourced information from the article. Instead of reinstating the images, Jeppiz should have provided some sources that those persons were Tajiks ''before'' making edit. But, as I can see, no sources were ever provided. This resulted in an full-scale edit war, and the article is now temporarily protected. So, to conclude: following Misplaced Pages's policy on ], we should '''not''' include images of people for whom we have no reliable sources to prove that they were Tajiks. We don't need consensus for that, Misplaced Pages policies are themselves result of a longstanding consensus. So, editors arguing for the inclusion of those images should use those few days while the article is protected to present some reliable sources to prove those persons were Tajiks. If no sources are presented in a timely manner, those images should be removed. Now, please, everybody, stop arguing about who started the edit-war and who is guilty, and start presenting sources. '''] ]''' 00:17, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
:Thank you for looking into the issue Vanjagenije. I am one of the editors who objected to the inclusion of non-Tajik images into the gallery of the Tajiks. ] (]) 00:49, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

:Add ] and ] to the list of people who should be removed. I was tricked by Kohistani's page because it used to state that she was Tajik (with a reference), but as I have discovered, the was used deceptively and did not mention anything about her ethnicity being Tajik. So to reiterate, for anyone who wishes to re-add any of these pictures, reliable sources must be posted on the page of the subject themselves, and you must post here listing the article you have added the reliable source(s) to so that we can judge its veracity.

:The article content should be discussed as well. I believe we should remove any mentions of the Samanid Empire because it is anachronic and has nothing to do with the modern Tajik ethnicity, ''even if it was called Tajik''. Because as we have already established, 'Tajik' had a different meaning in the past and was not an ethnonym. I'd like further opinions on this. ] (]) 17:05, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

*'''Comment''' Unfortunately, some editors are using their own interpretations and ] to decide who is Tajik and who is not. To take but one example, the insistence that we can only deal with "modern" Tajiks is entirely erroneous. For most galleries in infoboxes on different peoples and nations, there are both modern and more ancient personalities. For instance, Leonardo da Vinci is listed as Italian, even though "Italy" didn't exist at the time and Erasmus is listed as Dutch. Correct in both cases. I'm a bit unsure about what "sources" are needed. Few people except loony extremists require DNA testing to determine a person's ethnicity, so if a modern person is both Tajik, quite obviously we list them as Tajik without going into some bizarre ethnic testing. This comes to mind reading the suggestion to remove Hammasa Kohistani. It's really quite simple. We apply '''the same criteria''' for this article as for any article article on any people/nation. The bar is not any higher here than elsewhere. When reading that ] is not only limited to removing anyone not explicitly called Tajik but even wants to remove historical people called Tajik, it's no longer possible to keep good faith and it becomes obvious we're back to the tiresome nationalist campaign that various socks have been waging on this article for over a year now.] (]) 18:35, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

::There are currently no reliable sources stating that they are Tajik. The fact that you attempt to contrast Leonardo da Vinci being Italian with Avicenna, Khwarizmi or Rumi being Tajik as a response to my claim of the latter being anachronistic is laughable. Again, please find reliable sources which back up your claims of these subjects' Tajik ethnicity.

::I would highly recommend that you strike your last sentence which states that it's "no longer possible to keep good faith" before going on to accuse me of 'nationalism' and sockpuppetry. These accusations are completely baseless and not conducive to the conversation whatsoever. ] (]) 21:02, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

:::It's not a secret that this article was the target of a long campaign by several socks and I see no reason to strike a perfectly factual statement. I'm not saying you're a sock, I'm merely stating you (and several others) have been edit warring about exactly the same issue that those socks used to edit war about, also a perfectly factual statement. As for factual matters, I note that your only response is to dismiss my comments as "laughable". Neither serious nor convincing.] (]) 21:32, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

::::Da Vinci was born in Florence, an Italian city-state on the Italian peninsula whose inhabitants identified as Italian. He spoke Italian. There are hundreds, if not thousands of references calling him Italian. How does that lead you to conclude that Avicenna, a Persian person who spoke Persian and who was born in a Persian empire, is therefore Tajik - an ethnic sub-group of Persians that didn't exist back then? Do you not see how illogical and anachronistic that is? If you want to prove me wrong, do it with reliable sources, not with your own opinion.

::::I still don't understand how you mischaracterize removing unreferenced materials as 'edit warring'. You are right that it was added by socks who have edit-warred ever since to keep it in the article. But to state that those who have removed it are 'edit warring' is just... ] (]) 21:53, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

The fact here is that none of these people are mentioned as Tajiks in any source, all this is speculation at best. Jeppiz is wrong in his assertion that there was a vandalism and and edit war going on here, i see none of that going on here. Therefore it is correct to remove these images of past figures since they were not or seen as Tajiks and no sources confirm them as such. I think a vote should be taken here to those who oblige whether these people's images should stay or not to resolve the issue. ] (]) 05:57, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

:{{re|Akmal94}} Considering that retaining these pictures would be a clear violation of ], I don't think a vote is necessary. ] (]) 17:28, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

'''Comment''' It's better to try ] and ] or ask expert editors on this topic to help, and if you can't reach consensus, then go to ]. Otherwise, all of you have a chance to get blocked or topic-ban. The article is unstable due to continuous edit warring. If edit wars start after the end of current protection again, all involved editors are responsible. So solve it on here and reach a consensus. --] (]) 18:45, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

::{{re|Zyma}} Incorrect. Misplaced Pages is not intended to be used as a ] or ]. Any information which is not cited will be removed as soon as page protection expires. Exceptional claims require exceptional sources, and the claims made on this article have ] on Misplaced Pages. The burden does not lie with anyone else to 'seek consensus' or to try and prove a negative. ] dictates that this information should be deleted. This is not to say that I have any issue with the article displaying the picture of a subject who has a reliable source(s) verifying their ethnicity. If you feel it is necessary, no one is stopping you from requesting an RFC. ] (]) 19:15, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 16:10, 8 January 2025

Articles for deletionThis article was nominated for deletion on 23 July 2011 (UTC). The result of the discussion was speedy keep.
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tajiks article.
This is not 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 rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconEthnic groups Start‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups
StartThis article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:

Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks:

Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

WikiProject iconAfghanistan Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Afghanistan, a project to maintain and expand Afghanistan-related subjects on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AfghanistanWikipedia:WikiProject AfghanistanTemplate:WikiProject AfghanistanAfghanistan
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconTajikistan Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Tajikistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Tajikistan-related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TajikistanWikipedia:WikiProject TajikistanTemplate:WikiProject TajikistanTajikistan
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconCentral Asia: Uzbekistan Top‑importance
WikiProject iconTajiks is part of WikiProject Central Asia, a project to improve all Central Asia-related articles. This includes but is not limited to Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Tibet, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Xinjiang and Central Asian portions of Iran, Pakistan and Russia, region-specific topics, and anything else related to Central Asia. If you would like to help improve this and other Central Asia-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.Central AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Central AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Central AsiaCentral Asia
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Uzbekistan (assessed as Top-importance).
WikiProject iconIran Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconChina Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconPakistan Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconZoroastrianism Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Zoroastrianism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Zoroastrianism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ZoroastrianismWikipedia:WikiProject ZoroastrianismTemplate:WikiProject ZoroastrianismZoroastrianism
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
This article is substantially duplicated by a piece in an external publication. Since the external publication copied Misplaced Pages rather than the reverse, please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source:
  • Miller, F. P., Vandome, A. F., & McBrewster, J. (2009), Demography of Afghanistan: Afghanistan, history of Afghanistan, Afghan (name), Pashtun people, Tājik people, Alphascript Publishing{{citation}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
Additional comments
OCLC 502359870, ISBN 9786130061432.
Archiving icon
Archives
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3


This page has archives. Sections older than 100 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present.

Sunni islam should be made explicit in the info box please, not just islam

Sunni islam should be made explicit in the info box please, not just islam

We should make a modern era section.

The current history section in this page just talks about the origins of Tajiks. We should make a modern era section, that many other ethnic group pages already have. Tajiks have had plenty of history in the USSR, Soviet-Afghan War, Afghan civil war, and the current situation in Afghanistan right now.

Semi-protected edit request on 26 November 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
2A00:801:7A6:EAD4:C54A:A21F:C8AD:DE94 (talk) 13:44, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Uzbekistans goverment did’t estimate that numbers as 2 to 11 million Tajiks in Uzbekistan. You should put that to the estimate of Richard Foltz. Richard Foltz linked as source to this page told us that he believes that there are between 6 to 11 million Tajiks in Uzbekistan. You changed the numbers please put it back to previous. If Uzbekistans government estimated that as 2 to 11 million please share us sources.

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 17:27, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Extinction of Eastern Iranian Languages.

Only little of the Extinction of Eastern Iranian languages should ever be attributed to "The spread of the Persian Language" as using this idea to answer the question of "why in the world many of these people speak persian who arent persian but a mixture of iranians" is dangerous and neglects the years of genocide that the region of Central Asia has lived through

Just like the parts of China which once was inhabited with Scythians and other Iranian peoples(whether genetic differences are or arent it doesn't matter as in a general sense they were Iranians)We can conclude that these regions were colonized by Turks and Mongols who formed two groups

1.The fleeing Turks 2.The colonizing Turko-Mongolians

1.The fleeing Turks These turks being the people who ran away from Mongolians during the Mongolian Plundering of Central Asia and settled as "immigrants"

2.The subsequent Colonization of Central Asia These Mongolians and Turks who colonized these lands after destroying its native inhabitants and reducing them to modern day Tajikistan and Afghanistans Borders.

Now, how does this answer what i was referring to of course, as to what lead to the eastern iranians speaking "Farsi" as a language, well i ask you? When your people , land and cities are burned and your people mostly wouldve understood two languages one being universal to your people " due to the the ancient empire of Iranshar and Arabian Islamic Empire, which wouldve incentivized Learning Farsi as that was the language that was close to the lands in which the capital of the islamic empire was established among Iranians as the language to use to get economical and social benefits in the courts of Baghdad" And when your nations and lands and cities of cultures are turned into nothing but rubble and stone (but of course this isnt genocide because Genghis khan was a good man who allowed religious freedom throughout his tolerent empire) tell me, if you had 200 bactrians, 100 khwarazmians, 200 sogdians and these people all fled to lets say kabul, and they spoke two languages one native to there lands and the other being Farsi, wouldve these people had the opportunity to bother saving there languages if the lives of there sons, daughters, mothers, brothers, sisters, and other relatives were underthreat? Would've they been worried about preserving there languages or wouldve they chosen the most convenient thing and making the best of the situation they had to survive in as little as possible, wouldve they preferred to become entirely Turkic or adopted another Iranian language that secured there bloodline is some manner if not the other?

Please understand that i dont have any intentions here besides to have a civil debate on this topic as it would be very important to ask why did coincidentally many genocides in history was committed by certain groups against only certain groups. 2607:FEA8:FC60:7C5A:12AD:F0E7:662A:6FB (talk) 15:47, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

I can add further for my "hypothesis" here of why Turkization, (where it was Absolute gencoide and integration of a few remaining remnents of the Iranian peoples to turkic societies) might've had been mores successful than other regions of greator Iran, well to answer this we can look at two parts of iran that was changed , Iraq and Central Asia, where these lands where changed, iraq to arabia and Central Asia to Turkic
The thing we can assume that allowed such an event to take place couldve been that Turks and mongols were closer to central asia Before as compared to the time they "migrated" from parts of mongolia to Central Asia(during the white hun and heptalite time periods) where there presence couldve been present but not spread out as it is today as it seems turks only seems to have been able to carve empires out of places where they lived and inhabitant and not places that had different ethnic groups because unlike the tolerant empire of iran created by Cyrus which respected other peoples, it turns out people dont like it when you wish to "erase" them from history.
We could use the reasoning above to understand why turkization of Central asia was successful as the land was
1.Now closer to the steppe lands that turks controlled, hence giving them advantages for moving , unlike before where it wouldbe been guarded
2.The destruction of central asia, providing new opportunities for turks to move and settle to central Asia, which also occured twice, once with Genghis and other time with Timurlame
(Timurs intelligence here is undermined as he didnt "beatify" Samarkand as city that his ancestors destroyed because he was in love of the arts and crafts but because it wouldve been a good opportunity to finally give a foothold to turks to access iran(which succeeded because iranians in iran got more susceptible to raids, plunders and gradual colinization of iran by Turkic tribes which partly was also stopped by Turks themselves, ironically.) 2607:FEA8:FC60:7C5A:12AD:F0E7:662A:6FB (talk) 16:07, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Origins of the Tajiks

I'm adding the full list of origins and possible origins for the Tajiks from both Tajikistan and Afghanistan. I have added citations, and evidence. Tajiks are a mixed group, they are not actually Persians, but they are their own unique group with their own amazing history, at the same level as Persians. Again they are MIXED. They also have some Greek ancestry due to the Greek conquests of Central Asia. The Greeks and Macedonians lived in Bactria in Tajikistan and northern Afghanistan. Have a look at the people referred to as Dayuan in the citations and internal link I added. I believe in honesty. So make sure you understand what true history is, and not make up your own stories. Thanks. Leopardus62 (talk) 05:06, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Do you have references that back up your claims? DNA test results on research papers etc? As far as I know, their closest group (pashtuns) don't have greek admixture beyond a few haplogroups according to latest research Nowtis (talk) 11:03, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
replying to what Leopardus said, Tajiks even though they cant be considered "greek" they can be considered descendents of Greco-Bactrians considering that many of there tradition's, cultures and values came from the greeks but it was a mix of the region, the most important thing to Leopardus62 right now should be acknowledging that many histories of tajiks have been lost with the Mongolian genocide of our regions, tajiks could be descendants of a number of the lost eastern iranian tribes, but nonetheless i do think , us tajiks reserve the right to distinguish ourselves from Persians of iran who say we speak "dari"(an insult term to undermine the language we speak , but we understand) and "Pashtuns" who call themselves
Descendents of Israelites,
And are also closely tied to the region of the india, where ironically more pashtuns live in Pakistan outside of "Afghanistan" than the region they claim to.
Still the time i would assume has come for Tajiks, to either they integrate to Pashtun societies or iranian ones, or make one of there own, we cannot let our lives be dictated by corrupt warlords who only think about there own pockets or Pashtuns who wish to change us into there own culture or iranians who consider us alien to themselves and consider themselves "European"(lol)
I do believe tajiks are a unique people that are stuck in a war that they shouldn't be a part of (rule of the majority in afghanistan forces the tajiks to fight for pashtuns and there wars thus putting them in a really hard situation as they have nothing to gain and everything to lose) 2607:FEA8:FC60:7C5A:97EA:B715:7199:993F (talk) 19:21, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
I don't need to show you, of all people, DNA results proving Greek descent. Furthermore it is extremely difficult and largely impossible to pinpoint Greek descent with DNA haplogroups. It's mainly guess work. I have actually studied Genetics at university to know this. Also, no actual studies have conclusively proven that Pashtuns have Greek descent. A lot these studies that are used for Pashtuns are statistical and speculative. The only actual evidence comes from archeology.
So understand that archeology and historical evidence is also evidence used to justify descent and relations. The Macedonians and Greeks heavily colonized and ruled the area of Northern Afghanistan and Tajikistan, which was called Bactria. Tajiks are native to Northern Afghanistan and Tajikistan (i.e. Bactria). Southern Afghanistan was not Bactria. Also, Bactria was very Greek after that time. The Greco-Bactrian kingdom is an important part of the history of Tajiks. Go read about the Dayuan people, who were related to the Greco-Bactrians, mentioned by ancient historians.
Also, Pashtuns are not originally from northern Afghanistan or Bactria. Look up the article titled 'Pashtun colonization of northern Afghanistan'. Pashtuns did not live in northern Afghanistan or Bactria, and only recently, in the last 200 years, did they reach northern Afghanistan. In addition, MANY ethnicities in Afghanistan have Greek descent, not just Pashtuns.
Therefore, please research and read the required works regarding historical evidence and archeology (which I have done a lot), and understand that you don't own this article. It is a communal and collaborative work. Don't disrupt the improvement of the article, and take out good information that is usually included in other important Misplaced Pages articles. Leopardus62 (talk) 04:41, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Eastern Iranian

The article incorrectly claims that Tajiks are "Eastern Iranian." This is factually inaccurate, as "Eastern Iranian" is a linguistic classification and cannot be applied to Tajiks, who are native speakers of Persian—a Western Iranian language. Ancestry (or presumed ancestry) is irrelevant when using precise linguistic terminology. Both Hazaras and Tajiks are, by definition, "Western Iranian peoples" and belong to the broader Persian linguistic and cultural group. All Persian dialects, including Hazaragi and the Tajik dialects of Tajikistan, are more closely related to Kurdish and Tati than to Pashto or Ossetian. Notably, Ossetian is spoken in the outer northwest of the Iranian linguistic world but is still classified as "Eastern Iranian." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:71A0:8419:9800:5586:B6A9:8160:E0EF (talk) 01:14, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

not true, while Tajiks might have among them many Native Persians that would've migrated and settled in those lands, there bloodlines are more in line with the Eastern Iranians than that of Western Iranians, they have genetic similarity with the Pashtuns, yaghnobis, Pamiris and the rest. 2607:FEA8:FC60:7C5A:70DE:693C:977A:97E (talk) 16:10, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Categories:
Talk:Tajiks: Difference between revisions Add topic