User:Shishaz, User:Vofa, I would like to clarify: I didn't remove any sources or information provided with correct references. On the contrary, as a result of your edits, several new, academically sound sources were removed, including Encyclopedia Iranica, Armin Vambery, Rashid ad-Din and others.
1. On the claim that the Mongol theory is "unacceptable"
The text contains the phrase:
"However, this theory is highly questionable and widely regarded as unacceptable. No primary historical documents have been found to confirm that Genghis Khan or his commanders ordered their forces to settle in the area now known as Hazarajat. Furthermore, there is no historical evidence to support the claim that the origins of the Hazaras are linked to this military settlement". This statement is presented as generally accepted, although in fact Mousavi's opinion does not reflect the consensus in the scientific community. On the contrary, sources describe how military leaders and emirs, along with their troops and subordinates, remained in conquered cities and regions, including Khorasan (Rashid ad-Din writes about this) - a region covering most of modern Afghanistan, including Hazarajat. For example, Emir Tumai is mentioned there. Let me remind you that the term "Afghanistan" appeared only in the 18th century.
2. On the claim that "Despite these efforts, no evidence has been found to identify any Mongol-speaking Hazaras in historical records". This claim is refuted by at least two authoritative sources:
Armin Vambery personally traveled to Afghanistan and wrote about the Mongolian speech of the Hazaras near Herat (encyclopedias also refer to this).
Babur in his memoirs (Baburnama) also mentioned that some Hazaras retained the Mongolian language. This is confirmed in Iranica.
3. The fragment about the possible early ancestors of the Hazaras (the Hephthalites) has been removed
This block was based on an authoritative publication in the Encyclopedia Iranica, which describes possible earlier roots of the region's population.
4. Regarding genetics
The section states:
"Based on these findings, other studies suggest that the Hazaras originate from Central Asia and share high similarities with the region's Turkic populations."
The original Martínez-Cruz article states that the conclusion about the closeness to the Turks is based on autosomal microsatellites, which is not surprising given the centuries-old proximity. However, later works (using f3/f4, qpAdm, etc.) show a high level of the Mongolian component - up to 57.8% (Guanglin He article). Both views deserve a place in the article, if they are correctly presented and provided with references.
In addition, the data on autosomal markers are mistakenly placed in the Paternal haplogroups section, and the truly relevant study (for example, Volkov on R1b and Kipchak elements) was removed.
5. About language
The text states:
"Approximately 20 percent of the Hazara vocabulary consists of Turkic and Mongolic words, with Turkic terms making up the majority."
Meanwhile, sources contain different estimates of the ratio of Turkic and Mongolian borrowings. In particular, one of the articles in Encyclopaedia Iranica does not mention Turkic as one of the main linguistic layers in the Hazara language, but specifically highlights Mongolic influence. This link has also been removed.
Considering the above, I believe that the edits made by Vofa and Shishaz violated a number of Wikipedia rules, including WP:NPOV, WP:RS and WP:CON. All alternative viewpoints were preserved by me, and I didn't remove any properly sourced information, including material from Mousavi’s book and relevant genetic or linguistic studies.
I ask other users to speak out.
I especially ask HistoryofIran, The Squirrel Conspiracy, Canterbury Tail, Ymblanter, Liz to share their opinions. KoizumiBS (talk) 08:22, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Sounds good enough to me. Conceivably some stuff could use some slight adjustment/expansion in the future, as this is quite the topic, but that can always be done in the future. I propose your edit gets restored. HistoryofIran (talk) 12:12, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- 3 of these sources are anything but scientific (feel free to try and prove otherwise). Vambery was a science fiction writer, and his fantasies were liked by the British and he got paid for that, after claiming to travel to Central Asia. Allegedly, his journey went as east as Kerki, Turkmenistan. He was not a linguist. That is the source that you are relying on as to what language Hazaras spoke. Encyclopaedia Iranica is not reliable. While encyclopedias are reviewed and edited before being published, they are not peer reviewed. Vofa (talk) 12:34, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Do you have any evidence for all these claims? Also, I am still waiting for you to elaborate on the supposed sourced information that was removed, as you claimed . HistoryofIran (talk) 13:27, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- As for the sources, Encyclopaedia Iranica is considered a reliable source and is listed at WP:RSPS. Claims about the preservation of the Mongolic language by the Hazaras until the 19th century are supported by sources such as the Great Russian Encyclopedia and other scholars. The article cited by Iranica was published by the Central Asian Research Centre in London, an academic institution. KoizumiBS (talk) 09:31, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- encyclopaedias should not be cited. the source itself should be, if it has it. Vofa (talk) 14:54, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- According to what policy? HistoryofIran (talk) 15:00, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- none of your claims are cited. Hazaragi is a dialect of eastern Persian that is mutually intelligible with Kabuli dialect. Vofa (talk) 13:49, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Vofa, please show evidence for your claims, including the part where KoizumiBS allegedly removed sourced information, the latter which is the fourth time I am asking you to elaborate on. If you can't, then I see no reason why KoizumiBS's revision should not be restored. HistoryofIran (talk) 14:49, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- i did not think it was directed at me, apologies.
- most (or all?) Mousavi 1998 citations and references were removed, along with Martínez-Cruz.
- Atif Adnan citation was also displaced, with corresponding information removed. Vofa (talk) 15:05, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- I count twelve Mousavi 1998 citations (also counting each time the same citation was used) in the Source section in KoizumiBS's diff , so that's clearly wrong. I count Martínez-Cruz eight times in KoizumiBS's diff, so that's also wrong. That leaves Atif Adnan, please elaborate further on that. HistoryofIran (talk) 17:27, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- The information from Mousavi's books was not removed. It was presented as widely accepted: "However, this theory is highly questionable and widely regarded as unacceptable. No primary historical documents have been found to confirm that Genghis Khan or his commanders ordered their forces to settle in the area now known as Hazarajat. Furthermore, there is no historical evidence to support the claim that the origins of the Hazaras are linked to this military settlement". Although it represents a personal opinion. My proposed edit was more neutral and accurate: "Sayed Askar Mousavi, however, questions the theory that these military units were permanently settled by direct order of Genghis Khan or his commanders in what is now Hazarajat. He argues that no known primary sources support such a claim, and views this interpretation as lacking historical foundation". @HistoryofIran, I would appreciate your thoughts on this version. KoizumiBS (talk) 06:31, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- None of Mousavi’s views were removed - they were just grouped together in one paragraph for clarity. KoizumiBS (talk) 06:40, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- The text contains the following phrase with reference to Atif:
- "Based on these findings, other studies suggest that the Hazaras originate from Central Asia and share high similarities with the region's Turkic populations."
- However, Martínez-Cruz writes primarily about genetic closeness to Turkic populations. My edit was:
- “Genetic analyzes using methods such as pairwise genetic distances, multidimensional scaling (MDS), principal component analysis (PCA), and phylogenetic reconstruction have shown that the Hazaras are genetically closer to Turkic-speaking populations – such as the Uyghur, Kazakh, and Kyrgyz of northwest China – than to other Central or South Asian groups or to Mongols.”
- Atif, however, presents a complementary perspective:
- “Additional analyses, including f3, f4, f4-ratio, qpWave, and qpAdm, indicate that while Hazaras share substantial genetic components with East Asian populations, approximately 57.8% of their ancestry can be traced to Mongolian-related sources.”
- Again, I did not remove any content - sources were simply reorganized to match the material they supported. @HistoryofIran, just following up to ask again for your thoughts on this version. KoizumiBS (talk) 06:54, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- Sounds good. I am not impressed with these "arguments" against your revision, as they are clearly not true. HistoryofIran (talk) 10:48, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- WP:NOTESSAY Vofa (talk) 16:47, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- What? Sorry but that has nothing to do with that? I assume this is meant to be a reply to my "According to what policy?" question? HistoryofIran (talk) 21:32, 28 June 2025 (UTC)
It has been claimed that I have not removed any sourced content, while it is entirely clear to everyone that a large number of sources and sourced contents have been unfairly deleted under the edit summery "I tried to bring the text to a more readable and encyclopedic style" Furthermore, many other sections have also been altered in terms of meaning against to its sources. This is a clear act of deception and a violation of Wikipedia’s policies, which should not be ignored. For example:
It has been claimed that I have not removed any sourced content, while it is entirely clear that a large number of sources and sourced contents have been unfairly deleted under the edit summery “I tried to bring the text to a more readable and encyclopedic style” Furthermore, many other sections have also been altered in terms of meaning against to its sources. This is a clear act of deception and a violation of Wikipedia’s policies, which should not be overlooked. For example:
- Although the Hazaras are a mix of multiple distinct ethnicities, a number of researchers focus on their Mongolic component. Some authors, including Elizabeth Emaline Bacon, Barbara A. West, Yuri Averyanov, and Elbrus Sattsayev, refer to them as "Hazara Mongols". However, no historical documents have been found that explicitly mention the term "Hazara Mongols," no researchers encountered Mongol-speaking Hazaras. → This is removed: "However, no historical documents have been found that explicitly mention the term "Hazara Mongols," no researchers encountered Mongol-speaking Hazaras."[1]
- According to historian Lutfi Temirkhanov, Mongolian detachments left in Afghanistan by Genghis Khan or his successors became the foundational layer of Hazara ethnogenesis. → This is removed: "However, this claim is highly contested and remains questionable and unacceptable. To date, no credible evidence or primary sources have been found to support the idea that Genghis Khan or his commanders ordered their troops or detachments to settle in what is now known as Hazarajat."[2]
- In the Ghilji neighborhood, Hazaras are called Moghol. → This is removed and have been changed in terms of meaning against to its source: "In turn, the Hazaras have also been called Qarluq, Khalaj, and Turkoman (They are from prominent Hazara tribes)."[3]
- Scholars such as Vasily Bartold, Ármin Vámbéry, Vadim Masson, Vadim Romodin, Ilya Petrushevsky, Allah Rakha, Fatima, Min-Sheng Peng, Atif Adan, Rui Bi, Memona Yasmin, and Yong-Gang Yao have written about the historical use of the Mongolian language by the Hazaras. → This is removed: "Despite these efforts, no evidence has been found to identify any Mongol-speaking Hazaras in historical records."[4]
- → This is removed: This genetic study on the Hazaras has been completely removed and changed in a way that contradicts the cited source, which is incorrect and leads to a completely different meaning and interpretation: "Analyses suggest that the Hazaras are more closely related to the Turkic populations of Central Asia than to Mongolians, East Asians, or Indo-Iranians."[5]
- According to Dr. Lutfi Temirkhanov, a Doctor of Sciences, the ancestors of the Hazaras were originally Mongol-speaking. However, following their resettlement, they began to intermingle with Persian- and Turkic-speaking populations. → This is removed: "Despite this, no historical documents have been found that refer to "Mongol Hazaras," and no scholar has encountered Mongol-speaking Hazaras to date."[6]
- Temirkhanov explains, "Hordes of Mongol princes and feudal lords found themselves in a Persian-speaking environment; they mixed with them, were influenced by Persian-Tajik culture, and gradually adopted the Persian language." → This is removed: "However, this claim is highly doubtful and unacceptable, as no firsthand documents or evidence have been found to indicate that Genghis Khan or his commanders ordered their forces to settle in the region now known as Hazarajat."[7]
- Some sources indicate that in the 16th century, during the time of Babur, some Hazaras still spoke a Mongolian language. According to the Great Russian Encyclopedia and other sources, some Hazaras continued to speak Mongolian until the 19th century. → This is removed: "While historically no one has yet succeeded in finding Mongol-speaking Hazaras, nor has any scholar come across Mongol-speaking Hazaras."[8][9]
- You are welcome to add new sources and information, but you should not remove existing sources or content from the article, nor make changes to them in a way that hides the facts.--Shishaz (talk) 07:22, 28 June 2025 (UTC)
- 1. However, no historical documents have been found that explicitly mention the term "Hazara Mongols," no researchers encountered Mongol-speaking Hazaras. - According to Sayed Askar Mousavi, the term "Moghol Hazaras" has not been found in historical documents, and no scholars have encountered "Mogholi-speaking Hazaras".
- 2. However, this claim is highly contested and remains questionable and unacceptable. To date, no credible evidence or primary sources have been found to support the idea that Genghis Khan or his commanders ordered their troops or detachments to settle in what is now known as Hazarajat. - Sayed Askar Mousavi, however, questions the theory that these military units were permanently settled by direct order of Genghis Khan or his commanders in what is now Hazarajat. He argues that no known primary sources support such a claim, and views this interpretation as lacking historical foundation.
- 3. In turn, the Hazaras have also been called Qarluq, Khalaj, and Turkoman (They are from prominent Hazara tribes). - In addition to their Mongol features, some Hazaras also show a noticeable resemblance to Khalaj and Qarluq Turks (according to source). There is no mention of Turkomans on this page in Mousavi's book. However, I think it is reasonable to mention them in this context.
- 4. Despite these efforts, no evidence has been found to identify any Mongol-speaking Hazaras in historical records. - According to Sayed Askar Mousavi, the term "Moghol Hazaras" has not been found in historical documents, and no scholars have encountered "Mogholi-speaking Hazaras".
- 5. Analyses suggest that the Hazaras are more closely related to the Turkic populations of Central Asia than to Mongolians, East Asians, or Indo-Iranians - Genetic analyses using methods such as pairwise genetic distances, multidimensional scaling (MDS), principal component analysis (PCA), and phylogenetic reconstruction have shown that the Hazaras are genetically closer to Turkic-speaking populations - such as the Uyghur, Kazakh, and Kyrgyz of northwest China - than to other Central or South Asian groups or to Mongolians. If you insist on mentioning East Asian and Indo-Iranian groups. I don't mind that.
- 6. However, this claim is highly doubtful and unacceptable, as no firsthand documents or evidence have been found to indicate that Genghis Khan or his commanders ordered their forces to settle in the region now known as Hazarajat. - Sayed Askar Mousavi, however, questions the theory that these military units were permanently settled by direct order of Genghis Khan or his commanders in what is now Hazarajat. He argues that no known primary sources support such a claim, and views this interpretation as lacking historical foundation.
- 7. Despite this, no historical documents have been found that refer to "Mongol Hazaras," and no scholar has encountered Mongol-speaking Hazaras to date. - According to Sayed Askar Mousavi, the term "Moghol Hazaras" has not been found in historical documents, and no scholars have encountered "Mogholi-speaking Hazaras".
- 8. While historically no one has yet succeeded in finding Mongol-speaking Hazaras, nor has any scholar come across Mongol-speaking Hazara. - According to Sayed Askar Mousavi, the term "Moghol Hazaras" has not been found in historical documents, and no scholars have encountered "Mogholi-speaking Hazaras"
- Look carefully. The information was not removed - it was rephrased. I am not against including material from Mousavi’s book in any section of the article. However, I believe it is important to clearly attribute such statements to the author in the text, so that readers do not mistakenly assume this view is universally accepted by the entire academic community.
- @HistoryofIran, just following up once more - would appreciate your thoughts on the points above when you get a chance. KoizumiBS (talk) 08:22, 28 June 2025 (UTC)
- I respectfully ask you to acknowledge the truth, as no matter how hard one tries, the facts cannot be hidden. You have removed sourced information from the article, including content based on the works of Dr. Sayed Askar Mousavi. Furthermore, you have made changes in other sections that contradict the cited sources, particularly in the genetics section. Despite this, you now claim that no sourced content has been removed, which is contrary to your edit revision. I will only provide some key examples of sourced content that your edits have completely removed from the article and no longer exist:
- This content is based on the works of Sayed Askar Mousavi, which you have changed and deleted in a way that hides the facts. As clearly stated in the book: "The tribe of Shaikh Ali also claim to be of Turkish origin and see evidence of this in the group among them known, to this day, as Turkman." "Among the ethnic groups forming the forefathers of the Hazaras were also the Khalaj and Qarlog Turks." In the article: "In the Ghilji neighborhood, Hazaras are called Moghol. In turn, the Hazaras have also been called Qarluq, Khalaj, and Turkoman." changed to "In the Ghilji neighborhood, Hazaras are called Moghol. In addition to their Mongol features, some Hazaras also show a noticeable resemblance to Khalaj and Qarluq Turks." You have removed Turkoman and claimed that the Hazaras only resemble the Khalaj and Qarluq which is contrary to the source, but you claim that it is based on the source, rather than acknowledging that these are Hazara tribes.
- In the Genetics section, you have completely removed sourced information. This contradicts the source and it is a disruptive edit: "Analyses suggest that the Hazaras are more closely related to the Turkic populations of Central Asia than to Mongolians, East Asians, or Indo-Iranians." changed to "Genetic analyses using methods such as pairwise genetic distances, multidimensional scaling (MDS), principal component analysis (PCA), and phylogenetic reconstruction have shown that the Hazaras are genetically closer to Turkic-speaking populations - such as the Uyghur, Kazakh, and Kyrgyz of northwest China - than to other Central or South Asian groups or to Mongolians."
- In the Language section, you have completely removed three sources and their related information, which were based on the works of Dr. Sayed Askar Mousavi: 1. According to Dr. Lutfi Temirkhanov, a Doctor of Sciences, the ancestors of the Hazaras were originally Mongol-speaking. However, following their resettlement, they began to intermingle with Persian- and Turkic-speaking populations. "Despite this, no historical documents have been found that refer to "Mongol Hazaras," and no scholar has encountered Mongol-speaking Hazaras to date." 2. Some sources indicate that in the 16th century, during the time of Babur, some Hazaras still spoke a Mongolian language. According to the Great Russian Encyclopedia and other sources, some Hazaras continued to speak Mongolian until the 19th century. "While historically no one has yet succeeded in finding Mongol-speaking Hazaras, nor has any scholar come across Mongol-speaking Hazaras."
- Shishaz (talk) 12:32, 28 June 2025 (UTC)
- @KoizumiBS: I personally would not bother to entertain Shishaz anymore tbh, they're clearly the sock of the same person whom we have both spent a lot of time on (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Iampharzad). Would appreciate your input there. HistoryofIran (talk) 21:24, 28 June 2025 (UTC)
- Shishaz got blocked shortly after this comment. I've restored KoizumiBS's revision, as none of these claims against them were proven. --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:19, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
- @HistoryofIran, thanks! As you previously suggested, I slightly revised and expanded a few sections to improve clarity and balance. Let me know if you have any further suggestions. KoizumiBS (talk) 07:27, 8 July 2025 (UTC)
@Vofa: Wrongly claiming that KoizumiBS removed loads of sources, misciting policies and now reverting me, accusing me of vandalism is not a good look. HistoryofIran (talk) 01:15, 9 July 2025 (UTC)
- the dispute was not settled. you went over and removed our contributions without reaching a consensus. the last nail was a known vandal reverting my rollback without an explanation when i reached out to his Talk page, strangely, the user involved in the conflict made an inappropriate comparison and summarised my actions as 'laughable'. Vofa (talk) 01:27, 9 July 2025 (UTC)
- You’re WP:STONEWALLING. And you’re once again misciting policies, this time WP:FORUM. Please revert yourself. HistoryofIran (talk) 01:54, 9 July 2025 (UTC)
- you have certainly not presented any proposals to move forward toward a solution. i did not stone-wall, pings get to me minutes, hours, days after they arrive. i ask you to follow guidelines and principles to find a solution and to understand where your concerns/opposition lie. Vofa (talk) 02:17, 9 July 2025 (UTC)
- unless a proposal is made, the discussion cannot move forward. if you are ready to outline issues (that you see) and propose changes, that would warrant a quick response. Vofa (talk) 02:19, 9 July 2025 (UTC)
- Now you're just making more stuff up. HistoryofIran (talk) 07:52, 9 July 2025 (UTC)
References
Mousavi, Sayed Askar (1998). The Hazaras of Afghanistan: An Historical, Cultural, Economic and Political Study. Curzon Press. p. 36. ISBN 0-7007-0630-5. Mousavi, Sayed Askar (1998). The Hazaras of Afghanistan: An Historical, Cultural, Economic and Political Study. Curzon Press. p. 35. ISBN 0-7007-0630-5. Mousavi, Sayed Askar (1998). The Hazaras of Afghanistan: An Historical, Cultural, Economic and Political Study. Curzon Press. p. 31. ISBN 0-7007-0630-5. Mousavi, Sayed Askar (1998). The Hazaras of Afghanistan: An Historical, Cultural, Economic and Political Study. Curzon Press. p. 31. ISBN 0-7007-0630-5. Martínez-Cruz, Begoña; Vitalis, Renaud; Ségurel, Laure; Austerlitz, Frédéric; Georges, Myriam; Théry, Sylvain; Quintana-Murci, Lluis; Hegay, Tatyana; Aldashev, Almaz; Nasyrova, Firuza; Heyer, Evelyne (2011). "In the heartland of Eurasia: the multilocus genetic landscape of Central Asian populations". European Journal of Human Genetics. 19 (2): 216–223. doi:10.1038/ejhg.2010.153. ISSN 1476-5438. PMC 3025785. PMID 20823912. Our study confirms the results of Li et al's study that cluster the Hazara population with Central Asian populations, rather than Mongolian populations, which is consistent with ethnological studies. Our results further extend these findings, as we show that the Hazaras are closer to Turkic-speaking populations from Central Asia than to East-Asian or Indo-Iranian populations.
Mousavi, Sayed Askar (1998). The Hazaras of Afghanistan: An Historical, Cultural, Economic and Political Study. Curzon Press. p. 36. ISBN 0-7007-0630-5. Mousavi, Sayed Askar (1998). The Hazaras of Afghanistan: An Historical, Cultural, Economic and Political Study. Curzon Press. p. 35. ISBN 0-7007-0630-5. Mousavi, Sayed Askar (1998). The Hazaras of Afghanistan: An Historical, Cultural, Economic and Political Study. Curzon Press. p. 31. ISBN 0-7007-0630-5. Mousavi, Sayed Askar (1998). The Hazaras of Afghanistan: An Historical, Cultural, Economic and Political Study. Curzon Press. p. 36. ISBN 0-7007-0630-5.
.svg){kind=small}
