Jump to content

Talk:Bashkirs

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Comments

[edit]

There was a mistake that I corrected: European travellers Joannes de Plano Carpini and William of Rubruquis asserted that Pascatirs spoke the same language as the Hungarians, and not as the Bulgarians (who were their neighbours).

See William of Rubruquis'Account of the Mongols:

Of the riuer of Iagac [Marginal note: Or, Iaic.]: and of diuers regions or nations. Chap. 23.

[Iaic twelue dayes iourney from Volga. Pascatir.] Hauing traueiled twelue dayes iourney from Etilia, wee fonnd a mightie riuer called Iagac: which riuer issuing out of the North, from the land of Pascatir, descendeth into the foresaid sea. The language of Pascatir, and of the Hungarians is all one, and they are all of them shepheards, not hauing any cities. And their countrey bordereth vpon Bulgaria the greater, on the West frontier thereof. From the Northeast part of the said countrey, there is no citie at all. For Bulgaria the greater is the farthest countrey that way, that hath any citie therein. [The Hungarians descended from the Bascirdes.] Out of the forenamed region of Pascatir, proceeded the Hunnes of olde time, who afterwarde were called Hungarians. Next vnto it is Bulgaria the greater.

http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/h/hakluyt/voyages/rubruquis/chapter2.html

Hungarians were often called Turks (but never Bulgars), though their language is not related to the Turkic languages. Today some scientists deny the Hungarian ancestry of Bashkirs, although it is highly unprobable that Rubruquis (who met in his journey many Hungarian prisoners from Hungary) could mistaken Hungarian language to a Turkic language.

"related groups" info removed from infobox

[edit]

For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all {{Infobox Ethnic group}} infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 21:00, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bashkort is correct

[edit]

I have put also "Bashkort" as the name. "Bashkir" is a Russian word to call Bashkort. This people say "Bashkort", when talking to each other.Maybe when talking to Russians, they will say "Bashkir". If a Bashkort say "Bashkir" to another Bashkort, he is called "Mankurt" (russian wannabe) --Ramil MC 15:05, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The correct form will be Bashqort, not Bashkort. At the second, Bashkir is a form, traditional for English language. The usage of Bashkir does not depend of Bashkir's bein mañqort. I hope you are not mañqort. :) But it doesn't mean you should change English spelling --Üñţïf̣ļëŗ (see also:ә? Ә!) 22:46, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bashkirs Hungarians relations

[edit]

whats the nonsense here?? --fz22 (talk) 06:47, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Arheologija i etnografija Baskirii" published around 1960 (i've read its hungarian version)

the Baskhir-Hungarian deserved to be mentioned here ... i think.

According to the Hungarian standpoint: - Arab, Byzantine, Western European geographers reffered the Magyars as Bashkirs. - The early Magyars had three names given by their neighbours: (Turks/Bashkirs/Ungri = Byzantine/Volga Bulgars/Slavic peoples) - there are several coincidence in tribal names: Gyarmat = Jurmat; Jeno=Jenej; Magyar=Majar, Mozsarjan; Megyer=Miser - Friar Julian journeys - the Mongol invasion in Mid 13ht century destroyed Volga Bulgaria and the Magyar-Baskhirs as well. Our present-day Bashkirs orgin therefore is still uncertain ... --fz22 (talk) 09:10, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Language

[edit]

According to most sources Bashkirs were Maygars who under influences of their Turki neighbours began speaking their present language. But when the switch of languuage took place ? Kaşgarlı Mahmut (1005-1102) lists them as Turk. But Giovanni da Pian del Carpine (1180-1252) notes that they speak Hungarian. Isn't there a contradiction ? Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 11:10, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bashkort Kuresh.jpg Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Bashkort Kuresh.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Bashkort Kuresh.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:29, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

meaning

[edit]

maybe it means bozkurt. (Grey Wolves, a Turkish far-right wing organisation) maybe the legend of bozkurt and Bashkirs are the same? what you think? (i dont like the bozkurts, just saying) 88.64.182.125 (talk) 02:55, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bashkort Girls.jpg Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Bashkort Girls.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Bashkort Girls.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:28, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnogenesis

[edit]

Why is the spread of haplogroup r1b associated with the Bashkirs Andronovo culture?

For example, the Bashkir tribe Burzyan, in the settlement of which is common to the M269, natives of Turkmenistan (they left it in the opinion of Bashkir scientists in the 8-9 century). And when you consider that about 2,000 years ago, there (in Turkmenistan) moved soldiers who served in the Roman legion Marcus Licinius Crassus, you are left with no doubt that the Bashkirs are descendants of the Romans :) Bikkulov (talk) 14:00, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bashkirs' origins

[edit]

The article states that they are some sort of "Turkic" people, but the language is from Ugro-Finnish family. However, the genetic map of Bashkirs tells entirely different story. R1a is the most dominant and prevalent genetic group, distantly followed by R1b. Both are Slavic genes making up 95% of total population, so there could be a couple of possible scenarios here that had developed during the millennia: There may have been Turkic or Persian tribes migrating to the area under the name Bashkirs. The nomenclature "Turkic languages" in itself is wrong as all languages and dialects in that group actually belong to the Persian languages family. Turkish itself has strong roots in Pashtun and Farsi. However, at some point The Bashkirs and Slavs had met and occupied the same territory. It is fairly typical for Slavic tribes to settle in an area and accept the local names, like Slavs in Macedonia and Bulgaria, or in Denmark, for example. However their assimilation normally stops there. They preserve the identity through the customs and the family names, even if they are forcefully converted to another religion. I would haphazard a hypothesis that in the beginning some tribes of Ugro-Finnish may have settled in the area around Slavs. From the early days Slavic and Scandinavian interaction was intensive and long-lasting. It is not out of place to have a few Nordic tribes moving down to South during the Vikings' period in Russian history. When the Turks came, they named them Bashqor and forcefully converted them to muslim religion, as was their practice during their invasion of Europe. However majority of people in the area were Slavs, and we can see that clearly in the ending of seemingly muslim surnames: Rakhimov, Rasulev, Ismailov, Zairpov for example. The ending of these surnames is unmistakably Slavic. The sufixes "ev" and "ov" mean "of". For example Murtaza Rakhim-OV means Murtaza (son) OF Rakhim. That is something very specific and typical of Slavic surnames. It is typical for Russian, Bulgarian and Slavic Macedonian surnames, and to a lesser extent among southern Croats, especially in the area between Croatia and Bosnia. Coupled with genetic image of the people and we can see very neatly that these cannot possibly be neither Turkish nor Ugro-Finnish people. In fact, the Turkish gene is completely absent and Ugro-Finnish native y-chromosome N is just a tad better at 2.3%. Bashkirs are Slavs with a small percentage of Western Slavs, probably from Finland, hence the confusion about the Ugro-Finnish origins, and/or turkic language. Ugro-Finnish languages too belong to a sub-group of Turkic family of languages (Hungarian much more than Finnish). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.117.102.60 (talk) 12:54, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

horseshoes. Bashkirs are not Slavs, their language is turkic without any doubt and turkic is in no way related to Finnish, nor Hungarian. Whatever book you have been reading was a very bad book. --El bes (talk) 23:34, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnonym

[edit]

I don't know how accurate the beekeeping theory is, but for what it's worth, here's an earlier source:

http://elib.shpl.ru/ru/nodes/27-vol-i-1803#page/31/mode/inspect/zoom/4 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.70.245.41 (talk) 20:23, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Bashkirs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:12, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Religion in the infobox

[edit]

I think that adding Eastern Orthodox Christianit to the infobox was deliberate distortion of information. The information was added without any sources. Joshua Project is not reliable source, that was confirmed by the administrator. The absolute majority of sources indicates the predominance of Islam among the Bashkirs, almost nothing is mentioned about Christianity. Some sources talk about small group of Nagaibaks, but it's a moot point, because Nagaibaks are part of Volga Tatars. I think that it is necessary to remove this false information from infobox. --Rg102 13:44, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Sreda" source in Religion section

[edit]

This source has a rough estimate. The sum of the values in the table is not 100% (!) 1+25+11+43+1+6+2+1+1+1+1+1=94. I think it is unreliable source and wrong information. --Rg102 09:02, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bashkirs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this 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 by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:14, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Should we rename "Ethnonym" to "Ethnonym and origins"?

[edit]

The cited sources and theories are more than ethnonym-only content in my opinion. --Wario-Man (talk) 18:26, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Genetics: New study

[edit]

Published online 2017 Dec 28

  • Source
  • Quotes
    • "We detected unusually high amount of shared identical-by-descent (IBD) genomic segments between several Siberian populations, such as Khanty and Ket, providing evidence of genetic relatedness across vast geographic distances and between speakers of different language families. Additionally, we observed excessive IBD sharing between Khanty and Bashkir, a group of Turkic speakers from Southern Urals region. While adding some weight to the “Finno-Ugric” origin of Bashkir, our studies highlighted that the Bashkir genepool lacks the main “core”, being a multi-layered amalgamation of Turkic, Ugric, Finnish and Indo-European contributions, which points at intricacy of genetic interface between Turkic and Uralic populations. Comparison of the genetic structure of Siberian ethnicities and the geography of the region they inhabit point at existence of the “Great Siberian Vortex” directing genetic exchanges in populations across the Siberian part of Asia."
    • "As a standalone approach, an analysis of shared IBD is not sufficient to support the Finno-Ugric hypothesis of Bashkir origin as a sole source, while pointing at temporal separation of genetic components in Bashkir. Hence, we demonstrated that Bashkir genepool is a multifaceted, multicomponent system, lacking the main “core”; it is an amalgamation of Turkic, Ugric, Finnish and Indo-European contributions. In this mosaic, it is impossible to identify the leading element. Therefore, Bashkir are the most genetically diverse ethnic group of the Volga-Urals region." --Wario-Man (talk) 07:44, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tidy up of language for clarity and ease of reading

[edit]

I will not change the language content or the facts, nor alter any dates, it just does not read well. If some wording is swapped around and some sentences made a little clearer, perhaps shorter, it will be a much easier article to read. I hope the edit is satisfactory Pickypedian (talk) 18:22, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sock leftovers of Tirgil34 sock Әхмәт улы

[edit]

Krakkos restored sock edits of banned sockpuppet Әхмәт улы of the Long-term abuser Tirgil34.

  1. Sock edit 1 consists of the Andronovo fringe theory, >originally made up< by the banned sock Әхмәт улы.
  2. Sock edit 2 is about the use of Russian pseudo-sources "Европейско-Азиатские" and "Марина Шумилова", >originally made up< by the banned sock Әхмәт улы in the banned sock article Bashkardi people (recreated by MarkZusab • original page was hard deleted from the server, see the Web.archieve link ).

Confirmed in Tirgil34 Sockpuppet investigation. Compare Wario-Man's edit where he correctly identified Әхмәт улы's leftover from Bashkardi people. —2.247.251.202 (talk) 23:53, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:21, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The hyperlink to the “Danube Plains” links to the Danube Planum, a location on a moon of Jupiter, rather than the plain surrounding the Danube River on Earth. This link should be removed or changed to link to the location on Earth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.65.161.7 (talk) 15:06, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Expand Bashkir

[edit]

Template:Expand Bashkir has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 02:48, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bashkurd

[edit]

The Bashkurd ethnonym is used in early 19th century. https://www.academia.edu/39868553/THE_BUKHARAN_EMIRATE_AND_TURKESTAN_UNDER_RUSSIAN_RULE_IN_THE_REVOLUTIONARY_ERA_1917_1924 It should be the third alternative spelling, I have seen people from Russia use it when referring to the nation in 19th century. (I am not sure) Vofa (talk) 18:21, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let's not add anything until we have better sources than a Master's thesis. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 18:25, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Look, every spelling shouldn't be included. I can add 100 ways Bashkirs, etc. being spelled in English. You don't get the point here. Beshogur (talk) 18:28, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is an encyclopaedia. Three spellings should be fine. You are making a problem out of it. In actuality, there should not be a problem with me adding a historical spelling of an ethnic group which is still used. I have added the source. Vofa (talk) 18:34, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fine, based on what? Beshogur (talk) 20:02, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Based on several sources:https://www.academia.edu/39868553/THE_BUKHARAN_EMIRATE_AND_TURKESTAN_UNDER_RUSSIAN_RULE_IN_THE_REVOLUTIONARY_ERA_1917_1924 The source mentions “Bashkurd” or Bashkurds several times when referring to Bashkirs. The term “Bashkurd” is used by Bashkort people themselves according to this forum:https://lingvoforum.net/index.php?topic=55174.0
Here is another source:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322143061_From_the_Bascardi_to_the_Bashkirs_The_Fate_of_an_Ethnonym_during_the_13th-16th_centuries
Russian language source, printed in Ufa, capital of Bashkortostan:https://kitaptar.bashkort.org/files/bashkordy_ot_gilgamesha_do_zaratustry._ufa._2005.pdf
Bashkurdustan, Bashkurd exist as both the state name, and as an ethnonym, the same way it does with Bashkortostan, Bashkort or Bashkiria, Bashkir. Based on the sources and explanation I have provided, I will add the Bashkurd ethnonym, used in both literature and speech. Vofa (talk) 05:33, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why can't we see anyone using that actually? Beshogur (talk) 16:12, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's a fair point—according to an Ngram search "Bashkirs" is 100 to 350 times more common than "Bashkurd" so omission from lede seems justified. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 16:19, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Should be this way, however Bashkort is the anglicization of the ethnonym Bashqort. Bashkurd is pretty much wrong, anglicization of Turkish word Başkurt or Başkurd, and barely seeing anywhere. Beshogur (talk) 17:07, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you are not educated on the topic, it’s better to not insult the more knowledgeable individual. Destroying is easier than creating. Leave this page alone. Vofa (talk) 14:30, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You need to talk with the Bashkir people or others from Ural-Volga region. You have reverted my contribution without an explanation, which is vandalism. Vofa (talk) 06:10, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Vofa, please stop making such allegations against other editors. The revert was not undiscussed, but based on the above discussion, which you seem to ignore. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 06:20, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You need to talk with the Bashkir people or others from Ural-Volga region. That's not how exonyms work. The Deutschen have little say over being referred as "Germans" in English. Since there is already an extensive section about the ethnonym in the article, I'd suggest you to add sourced information about the various spellings there. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 07:20, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jähmefyysikko: It's worse is, as I told, "Bashkurd" is the Anglicization of the Turkish word, not Bashkir language. Beshogur (talk) 11:56, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bashkir is an ethnonym derived from the Russian language to describe the Bashkurds/Bashkorts. It’s not worse, it’s just how it is. Vofa (talk) 11:57, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's qort not qurt or kurt. Thus your Anglicization is pretty much wrong, and it is based on Turkish, like how Göktürks was based on Turkish word, but that version became widely known in English historiography. You need to talk with the Bashkir people or others from Ural-Volga region yeah no. That's not correct. Beshogur (talk) 12:52, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It’s not mine. It was used in the 17th century onwards. I did not come up with it. Vofa (talk) 14:32, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I already did so in my second comment. You thanked me for my edit yesterday. Did you change your mind?https://www.academia.edu/39868553/THE_BUKHARAN_EMIRATE_AND_TURKESTAN_UNDER_RUSSIAN_RULE_IN_THE_REVOLUTIONARY_ERA_1917_1924 The source mentions “Bashkurd” or Bashkurds several times when referring to Bashkirs. The term “Bashkurd” is used by Bashkort people themselves according to this forum:https://lingvoforum.net/index.php?topic=55174.0
Here is another source:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322143061_From_the_Bascardi_to_the_Bashkirs_The_Fate_of_an_Ethnonym_during_the_13th-16th_centuries
Russian language source, printed in Ufa, capital of Bashkortostan:https://kitaptar.bashkort.org/files/bashkordy_ot_gilgamesha_do_zaratustry._ufa._2005.pdf
Bashkurdustan, Bashkurd exist as both the state name, and as an ethnonym, the same way it does with Bashkortostan, Bashkort or Bashkiria, Bashkir.
Vofa (talk) 12:00, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did change my mind, based on arguments that were presented after your edit, and after looking at the frequencies of different ethnonyms with the Ngram search. Russian language sources are not relevant because we are discussing how they are called in English. Besides, I don't dispute the fact that Bashkurd exists as an ethnonym, but I am not seeing it common or otherwise relevant enough to be included in the introduction. Beshogur's argument seems plausible, but as long as there are no sources for or against it, we cannot discuss the issue in the article. What we could do is to list some of the more common spellings in the Ethnonym section. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 13:16, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Did you actually check his sources? One of them is Russian, other ctrl+f, nothing. Beshogur (talk) 13:29, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not carefully, no, because I find that the point he's trying to make with those sources is not relevant. But the Ngrams already show that the term Bashkurd exists, and is relatively rare. The Ngrams might of course be misleading (sometimes 19th century sources are reprinted, and presented as if they were recent publications, or there could be other confounding issues) so I should have been more careful. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 13:40, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not familiar with “Ngrams”. What kind of a source is that? It’s not a source, but I’m presuming a site for checking for the usage of words. This does not give you permission to revert the Bashkurd spelling. Vofa (talk) 14:07, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are links to Ngram searches above. The reason for reversion was the fact that there is no consensus for inclusion. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 14:22, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You do not need consensus from anybody. If the ethnonym is popular and is used, it should stay up there. I gave at least four sources to prove that it is used. You should not edit Wikipedia articles if you do not include sources and edit war all the time. Stay in your lane. You’ve confirmed that it exists. Do not edit war. Vofa (talk) 14:25, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I will repeat it for the third time, I have provided at least four sources. The term Bashkurd is used in daily conversations, historical documents, literature, and in social media. You can look up Башкурд in any social media, namely YouTube, where you will see heaps of videos from Bashkir authors mentioning the ethnonym Bashkurd. Vofa (talk) 14:05, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whether you like the spelling or not, it exists, and is used to this day. It should stay up. I’ve gone over and presented you at least four sources. Your excuse is using a popularity checker website (not a source). If you are not here to make an encyclopaedia, you should consider retiring. Vofa (talk) 14:20, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All the variants do not need to be presented in the lede. The different spellings should be given WP:DUE weight. Including this one in the lede is undue weight. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 14:25, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is a due weight. I do not see anything indicating it’s not. Are you here to make an encyclopaedia? Vofa (talk) 14:28, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Funny how first author is Turkish, second Azerbaijani, which supports my argument. I'm going to open edit warring noticeboard topic because I lost count of his reverts. Beshogur (talk) 14:41, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, add Bashgurd, Bashgird, Baskard, Bashkyrd, Bashdzhard, Pascatir, Bashirdi too? Beshogur (talk) 18:12, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, only three ethnonyms in English language is used: Bashkir, Bashkort, Bashkurd. See my explanation above. Vofa (talk) 06:11, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
only three ethnonyms in English language because you think so? Beshogur (talk) 13:29, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, because there are sources only for three ethnonyms in English. Vofa (talk) 14:00, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh so adding every spelling is acceptable since there is a source? Verification doesn't mean inclusion, and yet your two sources has Turkish and Azerbaijani authors, which supports my argument for the spelling "kurd" comes from Turkish, not Bashkir, which contradicts your "trust me bro" argument You need to talk with the Bashkir people or others from Ural-Volga region Beshogur (talk) 14:52, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I highly disagree. I presented four sources, not two like you claimed. The nationality of the authors is not relevant. The spelling is used by Russophone, Anglophone and Turkophone historians. Be it Башкурд, Bashkurd or Başkurt. I ask you to not belittle/insult historians, researchers or academics. Vofa (talk) 15:02, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Four sources? One is a forum, other one is Russian language. You don't even know who these people, Anvar V. Aksanov and Selim Öztürk, are. I say verification doesn't mean inclusion, and they're using Anglicized Turkish spelling of the word Bashqort (actual Bashkir spelling). Beshogur (talk) 15:29, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Öztürk source is a Master's thesis (not reliable per WP:THESIS). Aksanov's paper is in Russian, with only the abstract in English. It does not discuss the English term "Bashkurd". In fact, you have presented no sources to back up your claim. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 15:39, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your premise has the form of a disjunctive claim. Vofa (talk) 15:10, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bashkirs&oldid=1253547985"