This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Turkmens 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 Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Please do not replace the article with unwikified dumps of text grabbed from elsewhere. See Wikipedia:Copyrights and the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Thanks. -- Infrogmation 18:07, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The history of Iraqi Turkmens are not related with Ottoman Empire. They are descendants of Seljuks and Ilkhanates not the Ottomans. The given meaning of Turkmen as "Türk-men" (I am a Türk) is totally absurd. The way to say "I am a Turk" in Turkmen is "Men Türkem", "Men Türküm". In any of the Turkic languages from Siberian Yakut to Balkan Turkish the verb is always at the end of the sentence. The execptions that I know are Gagauz (Moldova) and Karaim (Lithuania).
http://ruhnama.info/ruhnama-en/kitap-htm/s10.htm -- Ga1taman 13:40, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Does the above paragraph really belong in this article? Seems inappropriate. SouthernComfort 01:06, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
The word "Turkoman" is combination of two words "Turk" and "Koman". Turk means strong and Koman might be corruption of "Cuman". The word "Cuman" might be corruption of word "Chemon" which means Cem, Kem, Kim, Chem, Khem peoples living around the globe. For example Kembojah, Khemr, Kama, Kamio, Kamen, Komnenos, Champas, Chamorro etc etc living as Arabs, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Shamans, Christians, Pagans and Muslims in almost all continents of the world. I beleive this word Kem/Cem/Chem takes its name from Biblical "Shem"(son of bibilical and Quranic Noah) being ancestor of Arabs and Hebrews(the most ancient peoples). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.71.190.49 ( talk) 05:20, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Do the Turkmen of central Asia and the Turkmen of Iraq really consider themselves to be part of a single ethnic group? Or do they consider themselves separate groups (admittedly under the larger umbrella of Turkic peoples) with the same name? -- Jfruh 23:02, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
(I'm an outsider editing adding a comment.) The one who added the article above, doesn't have any clue what he/she is talking about. He/she doesn't seem to know the difference between Turkish and Turkic. Turkmens and Turcomans of Iraq are NOT Turks. They are TURKIC peoples. Turks are relatively a young nation, on the other hand the history of Turkmens go back thousands of years. We dug finely worked ivory up in Turkmenistan hand made about 3500 year ago. Turkmens can't possible be Truks.
You have no ıdea eıther. they're all Turks. Turkıc ıs a synonym! But yes, Iraqi Turkmen ıs dıstınct. Half of them ıs sunni though.-- Bunifa88 ( talk) 21:45, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Just so everyone knows, I didn't just blank out the section. Tombseye 16:00, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
What does AH mean, as in 349 AH? What does it translate to in western time-keeping? What calendaring system is it, Islamic or Baha'i or Saka? 24.186.214.2 01:22, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Looking at Turkomen after the merge proposal, I thought they seemed like two different batches of people similarly named. Can anyone verify? They could be the same. Chris 07:17, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
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 21:13, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
What is so bad about this picture that it must need be removed from the article, where it had been happily sitting since April 2005? -- Lambiam 17:58, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
They had color photos back then you know and Russia was the place. This is an authentic color photo from the period, which is why it is still here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.99.241.102 ( talk) 00:31, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
I am a baloch of Iran.I have just heard about the turkmen baloch.Can any one tell where do they exist?and do they speak russian>Did any one(local) see them in Turkmenistan? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.96.229.85 ( talk) 11:53, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Türkmen Baloch refers to the citizens of Türkmenistan who are of Baloch ancestry, they are mainly found in the Merv Oasis of Türkmenistan.( ཧེ་དར - སྦལ་ཏི། ( talk) 18:05, 24 May 2022 (UTC))
"Turkmen" comes from the iranian word torkmand/torkman which in persian means "they became turk" ie they(the iranians of central asia)have been turkified "Turkmen" comes from the iranian word torkmand/torkman which in persian means "they became turk" ie they(the iranians of central asia)have been turkified.
john L.Drake —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.188.81.84 ( talk) 17:33, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
I wanted to mention to the picture about Major Ethnic Groups of Iran, Turkmens are in a vast area in iran, also azeries and qashqai, the government of iran wants to show that Turkic people in iran are so less, persian and kurds are more ! -- Snake co1 ( talk) 07:29, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Please take a look at the portraits in the top right corner of " Azerbaijani people" (or any other good article about an ethnicity). It shows a representative selection of ethnic faces, not just the current president. Yceren Loq ( talk) 22:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article,
File:Turkmen0012.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at
Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 18:54, 15 January 2012 (UTC) |
The article claims that the Turkish term "Yörük" used for Turkish nomadic or semi-nomadic groups in Anatolia and Balkans has phonetic variations Iirk, Iyierk, Hiirk, Hirkan, Hircanae, Hyrkan and Hyrcanae. This information is quoted from a Russian publication, which is unaccessible online and the name Hyrcania was, furthermore, the ancient name of a region between current Iran and Turkmenistan, whereas the etymology of the word "Yörük" is generally thought to be derived from the Turkish verb "yürümek" (to walk). http://books.google.cz/books?id=q_189OeDwSMC&pg=PA859&lpg=PA859&dq=Yörük Is there any further evidence for the existence of those phonetic variations mentioned in the article? Ayazid ( talk) 17:06, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Instead of calling other editors ignorant and edit warring, Siktirgitir should bring sources to support his opinions. The referenced information he is changing does not state parthian. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 19:00, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
I seems as I told before on your site that you are little informed, if you read barthold turkestan down to mongol invasion, rene grousse, steppe empires, cambrigde history of iran volume 3, The Cambridge History of Iran Volume 3: The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanid Periods, Part 1 ,The Cambridge History of Iran Volume 3: The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanid Periods, Part 2 ,
also in swedish, bra böckers världs historia, which means good books world history its like a encylopedia of the world history of mankind,
also the bonniers världs historia del 3, bonniers world history part 3 the parthians and sassanid era in iran, in swedish,
I have tones of references, its just some of I have read, I have gumaliev, wilhem radloff, thomsen, otto von maenschlefen,
I dont remember their books,
ce bosworth, bosworth american historian or english , unesco historical background of central asia, part 2 or three I dont clear remember,
peter golden, different books, faruk sumer , turkmenler oghuzlar book, the problem is that I dont remember all the books entitlements,
Peter golden is a major in iran and turkic and middle eastern history,
I have read minorsky, but he is not a good source, you feel more stupid than smart when you come out reading him,
ariminus vambery the jewish hungary , traveles thruth central asia or something the book was called,
I got reference from cambrigde history of iran volume 7 from nadir shah to the islamic republic, a statistics showing the rapid developent of irans economy from irans central bank and IMF , internationl monetary fund,
I have lots of lots of more the the bra böckers enclyocpedia , the whole bonniers, world history encholpedia, whole cambrigde of iran volumes , thought I dont remember everything, It was some years ago, the uzbek historian baya something, he died some years ago, and tatar valid tokan or something dont remember his name either, I have many many more source so please dont say I dont have any source, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siktirgitir ( talk • contribs) 23:29, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
The historian and books I mentioned is actuall books I have read, as I said on your page I dont know how to add source, and further notice, I havent seen at wikipedia, state pages of books, but if you want that , Ill do it to , you only make wikipedia a worse tool of knowlegde by removing , you are not adding any information, besides as I said you are little informed, since you didnt even know were the parthians lived, to me as a historian its a big error, anyhow, good luck by keeping wikipeida free from false information, and spreading false knowlegde, you are a hero to mankind, I admire your courage, If wikipedia had more talented like you than we would need no books, keep it up, --
Siktirgitir (
talk) 22:12, 4 December 2013 (UTC)siktirgitir
the tukmen ethnoloue report clearly reports as I have pointed out , they havent even checked it, its so stupid and ignorant, please can someone help me to this ignorant gentleman to see the true , they havent even checked the source and denies the source , how can you by so blind, please help other users, I dont have any other reverts since they have warned me because I said edward321 was deranged because he didnt read the source , I still hold to my opinion that the guy isnt fully aware of the source and there for not fully functional, as to vsmith and kansans bear seems to take sides and dont see the matter from an objective side, I have read the ethnologue report before and just clicked at the link and it confired what I edited , how can people be so blind, please someone with moral can they help me edit turkmen people article,-- Siktirgitir ( talk) 23:03, 14 December 2013 (UTC)siktirgitir
Public domain text on Turkmens
The Turkomans observe a difference between their children from Turkoman mothers, and those from the Persian female captives whom they take as wives, and the Kazakh women whom they purchase from the Uzbeks of Khiva. The Turkomans of pure race enjoy full privileges, while the others are not allowed to contract marriages with Turkoman women of pure blood, but must choose themselves wives among the half-castes and Kazakh captives.
As there exists a great animosity between the Yamuds and Goklans they do not intermarry, although they reckon themselves of equally noble lineage. The same hatred is extended to the Tekke Turkomans, whom the Goklans and Yamuds, moreover, look upon as their inferiors, being, according to their genealogies, the descendants of a slave-woman, whilst they are the posterity of a free-woman. (p. 71)
The more intimate connection of the Astrakhan and Kazan Tartars with the Mogols can be traced in their features; with the Nogay it is less visible. In like manner, the Turkomans further off in the desert, and the Uzbeks of Khive, have more of the Mogol expression than the Turkomans who encamp near the Persian frontier. The frequent intercourse of the Nogay, in latter years, with the Cherkess, seems to have improved their race; and notwithstanding the enmity that exists between the Turkomans and the Persians, it is still not unlikely that their close vicinity should have produced on the former a similar effect in a lapse of several centuries. The fact we have seen, that the Turkomans marry Persian women, when they take them as prisoners. The Turkoman women are, like the men, tall, and when young, well-shaped; their faces are rounder than those of the men; the cheek-bones less prominent; the eyes black, with fine eye-brows, and many with fair complexion; the nose is rather flat; the mouth small, with a row of regular white teeth. In a word, a great number of the younger part of the community might be reckoned as fair specimens of pretty women. (p. 73)
Bode, C.A. "The Yamud and Goklan tribes of Turkomania". Journal of the London Ethnological Society, vol. 1, 1848, pp. 60-78.
Page 210
Page 212
Rajmaan ( talk) 05:19, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
articles on all Turkic-related topics in Wikipedia seem very confused, and subject to a lot of nationalist propaganda. The Turkmen of Iraq and Syria are of an entirely independent ethnicity than the Turkmen of Turkmenistan (or the Turks of Turkey for that matter!) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.188.124.37 ( talk) 20:48, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
There were recent moves made on the proposal:
– And many similar articles which, on the same president, I would like moved - as would apply to all demonym based population describing articles in those cases those cases in which the plural form of the demonym differs from the singular form of the word.
As per:
Albanians,
Americans,
Armenians,
Australians,
Austrians,
List of Bahranis,
Belarusians,
Bosnians,
Brazilians,
Bulgarians,
Lists of Cameroonians and
Canadians, ...
As per
WP:UCRN as demonstrated in searches in ...
Designations that seemingly should remain as "... people" as the demonym retains the same form when indicating either singulars or plurals: Bhutanese people, British people and Chinese people,
I think that this sets a precedent which, if appropriate, can be followed.
Greg
Kaye 11:41, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
This seems like a key phrase, but I don't see it defined anywhere. I don't know enough about it to know if its worthy of its own article, or a just a description here, but the lack of info hurts this article. 155.213.224.59 ( talk) 15:38, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
This has been said over and over again on this talk page, it seems, but nobody has arranged it. The very first line says: "This article is about the Central Asian ethnic group. For other related groups, see Turkmen." But then, the introduction states: " a Turkic people located primarily in Central Asia, in the states of Turkmenistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Afghanistan (...). Which is plane wrong, because the "Turkmens" in Iraq and Syria are definitely not part of the Central Asian people. They are not more related to Turkmenistan than any other Turk in Anatolia. But even in the infobox, Iraq and Syria do appear.
To clean this up is a huge work, but it should be done. Anybody around there to start doing it or to assist? Ilyacadiz ( talk) 14:25, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
This article is very confusing and providing insufficient or even false information. From the mid 900s until the First World War Turkmen or Turcoman was a synonym for Oghuz Turk. [1] Mustafa Kemal Atatürk wanted to end the Kipchak, Oghuz etc differentiation and therefore called his citizens simply 'Turks' after the First World War. The Oghuz Turks in Syria and Iraq did not go through this process initiated by Atatürk, and therefore still call themselves Turkmens. I think this is relevant information with the current situation in Syria and Iraq. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.114.182.240 ( talk) 12:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: no consensus. Reasonable arguments in opposition. Jenks24 ( talk) 04:33, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Turkmens →
Turkmen of Central Asia – Firstly, as requested by numerous Talk page participants, we really need to disambiguate Central Asian "Turkmen" from the "Turkmen" of the Near East, which are quite unrelated to each other, but regularly confused. The disambiguator could alternatively be added in parentheses, if that is preferred.
Secondly, in the majority of reliable sources I found, the plural form of the noun is "Turkmen", too, probably because "men" is already a plural form. This is also reflected by the article titles on
Iraqi Turkmen,
Syrian Turkmen and
Iranian Turkmen.
Both aspects should IMHO be exhaustively discussed first, before consistently implemented not just in the article titles but also in links and mentions within the text. --
PanchoS (
talk) 00:02, 3 December 2015 (UTC) Relisted.
Biblio
worm 20:57, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
Both user falsified [1], [2]. The estimate for Iran is 1-2% and both users falsified CIA data.-- 188.158.84.116 ( talk) 10:49, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
The Turkmens in Afghanistan are almost 2 Millions. The statistic 400.000 is from 1997 so i think it is Time to refresh it :D Actually theire are plenty other sources but they are in Persian or in Pashto or Turkmeni that is the English side i have found.
https://joshuaproject.net/people_groups/15654/AF — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prinsofpersia1999 ( talk • contribs) 11:21, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
In Afghanistan more than 6 million Turkmens living Oğuz Türkmen oğlu ( talk) 13:43, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
in iraq and syria there are signaficant turkmen population — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.44.29.248 ( talk) 03:52, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
You wrote wrong Turkmens are in Afghanistan maybe more than 6 millions why you wrote wrong please correct that Oğuz Türkmen oğlu ( talk) 13:41, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Turkmens. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:25, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
@ Hunan201p:, @ Manasam98:, I don't intend to involve myself too closely in this, but I just wanted to point out what our reliable source guidelines ( WP:SCIRS say about genetics sources, namely:
Respect primary sources
A primary source, such as a report of a pivotal experiment cited as evidence for a hypothesis, may be a valuable component of an article. A good article may appropriately cite primary, secondary, and tertiary sources. Use of primary sources should always conform to the No original research policy.
However, primary sources describing genetic or genomic research into human ancestry, ancient populations, ethnicity, race, and the like, should not be used to generate content about those subjects, which are controversial. High quality secondary sources as described above should be used instead. Genetic studies of human anatomy or phenotypes like intelligence should be sourced per WP:MEDRS.
So that this is clear, the guidelines describe the three types of sources as follows:
A primary source in science is one where the authors directly participated in the research. They filled the test tubes, analyzed the data, or designed the particle accelerator, or at least supervised those who did. Many, but not all, journal articles are primary sources—particularly original research articles. A secondary source is a source presenting and placing in context information originally reported by different authors. These include literature reviews, systematic review articles, topical monographs, specialist textbooks, handbooks, and white papers by major scientific associations. News reports are also secondary sources, but should be used with caution as they are seldom written by persons with disciplinary expertise. An appropriate secondary source is one that is published by a reputable publisher, is written by one or more experts in the field, and is peer reviewed. University presses and other publishing houses known for publishing reliable science books will document their review process. Do not confuse a scientific review (the article/document) with peer review (the activity).
Any sources being used on this article for information on genetics that do not meet this guideline are not RS and should be removed.-- Ermenrich ( talk) 13:01, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
Is there any reason why you can't mention it's Y-DNA aswell ? What is the reason for this exactly, please explain
DerekHistorian ( talk) 14:37, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
@ DerekHistorian and Hunan201p: Both of you should bring your concerns to talk page and solve it here. If you can't reach a consensus, ask for Wikipedia:Third opinion, Wikipedia:Requests for comment, or Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard. Same applies to other articles that you have reverted the edits of each other. -- Wario-Man ( talk) 13:01, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
@ Hunan201p: Your request at WP:RFPP for semi protection would not solve the dispute, and it would need further justification. I have fully protected the article for a week and any admin is welcome to alter the protection with no need for consultation. Warning to those who are editing: being right is not listed as an exemption from the WP:3RR edit-warring policy, and observing 3 reverts in 24 hours is not sufficient to avoid sanctions if engaged in a slow edit war. Please post a new section explaining what the problem with the disputed edit is, using simple terms that uninvolved people can follow. Ask for opinions at WP:RSN regarding any disputed sources. Ping me if further procedural information is wanted. Johnuniq ( talk) 05:58, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
This information has been removed, with the following edit summary: " Removed extensive POV using low quality references, as well a misinter0retation of a DNA study. WP:SYNTH." I think it is relevant and should be included.
A genetic study on the mitochondrial DNA ( mtDNA) haplogroups of a Turkmen sample describes a mixture of mostly West Eurasian lineages and minority of East Eurasian lineages. This most likely indicates an ancestral combination of Turkic and Eastern Iranian groups that the modern Turkmen have inherited and which appears to correspond to the historical record which indicates that various Iranian tribes existed in the region prior to the migration of Turkic tribes. Turkmens also have two unusual mtDNA markers with polymorphic characteristics, only found in Turkmens and southern Siberians. [1] [2]
References
{{
cite journal}}
: |archive-url=
is malformed: timestamp (
help)CS1 maint: url-status (
link)
Thoughts? -- Tobby72 ( talk) 15:56, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
Beshogur: you removed an inline cleanup tag with the explanation: "A nation is a stable community of people formed on the basis of a common language, territory, history, ethnicity, or psychological make-up manifested in a common culture. A nation is more overtly political than an ethnic group".
That's quite a broad definition. The only elaboration in the article refers to Soviet attempts to establish Turkmen national identity based on "a fixed territory and a common language", but it's not clear to what extent this succeeded. The "fixed territory" in this case would presumably be the present nation of Turkmenistan. So that would seem to be the nation in question. The use of nation in the lead section is therefore ambiguous, which is why I added the {{ explain}} tag. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 08:42, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
The haplogroup information and referannces can also be found in the Haplogroup Q-M242, right in the sections of Central Asia and Southwest Asia.
Haplogroup Q-M242 is commonly found in Siberia, Southeast Asia, Central Asia. This haplogroup forms a large percentages of the paternal lineages of Turkmens.
Grugni et al. (2012) found Q-M242 in 42.6% (29/68) of a sample of Turkmens from Golestan, Iran. [1] Di Cristofaro et al. (2013) found Q-M25 in 31.1% (23/74) and Q-M346 in 2.7% (2/74) for a total of 33.8% (25/74) Q-M242 in a sample of Turkmens from Jawzjan. [2] Karafet et al. (2018) found Q-M25 in 50.0% (22/44) of another sample of Turkmens from Turkmenistan. [3] Haplogroup Q have seen it's highest frequencies in the Turkmens from Karakalpakstan (mainly Yomut) at 73%. [4]
A genetic study on the mitochondrial DNA ( mtDNA) haplogroups of a Turkmen sample describes a mixture of mostly West Eurasian lineages and minority of East Eurasian lineages. Turkmens also have two unusual mtDNA markers with polymorphic characteristics, only found in Turkmens and southern Siberians. [5].
I see no reason why you can't edit any genetic information on Turkmen when every Turkic ethnic group has one (except for Turkmen). My edit recently got removed by editor User talk:Beshogur and accused me of being a sock in his edit summary, this is a serious accusation. Kezo2005 ( talk) 20:20, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
References
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link)
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link)
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: |archive-url=
is malformed: timestamp (
help)CS1 maint: url-status (
link)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I currently have a problem, the reason I used this template was because user and/or admin Ymblanter suggested I do so and that the page is protected. Due to the fact that user Beshogur had reverted my edit and claimed I was a sock [11] in 20 May 2020, that I had in response, made a talk page discussion and left a message on Beshogur talk page. [12]
I requested he make a sockpuppet investigation to prove my innocence, and the conclusion shows that I'm unrelated to any sockpuppet [13]. After 3 days, I still have not received any response from Beshogur in neither the Turkmen talk page or his personal talk page while he keeps editing other pages.
I already stated in the sockpuppet investigation that even if the banned sockpuppet WCF did indeed edit a similar genetic study he does not own any of the genetic material with multiple sourced references. I added some more genetic references which was from Haplogroup Q-M242, in the sections of Central Asia and Southwest Asia, which also mentions the Turkmen haplogroup genetics. Would someone please help me out on what I should do, thanks in advance. Kezo2005 ( talk) 19:18, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
@ TrynaMakeADollar: @ Beshogur: we need your opinion with editing genetics of Turkmen. I personally don't understand what's the exact problem. I believe we need to create concensus with others. the sources edited by Kenzo2005 are factual so have a look if there's any problem. I don't even if the ping are working properly. So I may send a message to the talk pages in case it doesn't work properly. Queenplz ( talk) 22:04, 25 May 2020 (UTC) @ TrynaMakeADollar: @ Shinoshijak: trying to ping again. I failed pinging TrynaMakeADollar. Even if I had fixed that template it mostly won't respond according after sign your post, Shinoshijak, I noticed you have not edited since 19 May. I don't know if you lacked interest in wikipedia or still using wikipedia but just can't find anything to edit yet but please give your opinion here. I really don't know who to ping. I searched for people to help me out. The editors I pinged previously either didn't respond, said they have no time, or din't understand the topic so told me to ask others for help. Queenplz ( talk) 22:49, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Queenplz ( talk · contribs) wants to offer a third opinion. To assist with the process, editors are requested to summarize the dispute in a short sentence below.
I would like someone to help me and Kenzo2005. So far I've pinged the other users since 4 days ago and they have not responded ( it could be the ping doesn't work) so I'm asking for a third opinion. Queenplz ( talk) 02:48, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
Kezo2005 I have deeply studied the genetics of Turkics, Indics and Iranics. Turkmens being Q in large numbers is true, you have further provided enough sources from studies too, go ahead and edit the page. -- Xerxes931 ( talk) 22:03, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
Claims are untrue and not backed up by some citations LordAgincourt ( talk) 21:54, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Have anyone realized that not even half of those persons in the first picture are Turkmen or related with Teke Turks? 46.114.3.237 ( talk) 18:14, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
Visioncurve, can you provide sources that mention any of these proposed etymologies that are more recent than 1930? One is even from the 1800s--obviously our knowledge of linguistics has advanced considerably since then. The most recent sources do not mention these derivations, suggesting that they are no longer held by linguists ( WP:AGEMATTERS) and thus are not wp:DUE on this page.-- Ermenrich ( talk) 16:17, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
their works have been reprinted zillions of times and are still used as primary source for citing necessary material in the relevant, modern booksthan you should be able to cite this use to support these etymologies.-- Ermenrich ( talk) 19:22, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
One may begin by reminding the reader that 'Turkmān' and 'Turkmen' are two forms of the same name, corresponding to two different etymologies. 'Turkmān', which appears frequently in Persian writing, was derived since as early as al-Birūni in the eleventh century from a supposed original Turk-mānind (lit. 'like a Turk'), the suffix being a Persian word; 'Turkmen', on the other hand, comes from Turk-men, the suffix a Turkic one for emphasis. The latter etymology has now generally been accepted.Boom: WP:RS/AC. The academic consensus is that Turk-men is an emphasized form of Turk. On Barthold we read the following in the footnote:
See Kellner-Heinkele, 2000, p. 682, for the two etymologies. The change in scholarly opinion is reflected in the fact that the Encyclopaedia of Islam in its first edition had the entry on 'Turk-mān', written by V.V. Barthold; in the second edition (2000) the entry is entitled 'Turkmen'.So there you have it, Barthold, lo and behold, is considered to have been wrong. What a surprise, considering he's been dead for 90 years.
The exact origin of the word Türkman has not been resolved. Some early scholars, beguiled by the French spelling "Turcoman," made the unacceptable suggestion that this word represented a compound of the ethnonyms Turk and Coman (that is, Kuman, a group of Kipchak Turks in eastern Europe). Other scholars feel that the formation Türk+man must mean 'resembling Turks,' and refer to the folk etymology suggested by contemporaries of the Oguz-Turkmen, including the Arab lexicographer Mahmud al-Kashgari who, in the 11th century, derived the word from Turk mānand, which means in Persian "These look like Turks." However, the most likely explanation of the word is that it is derived from the ethnonym Türk plus an intensifying element +man, which could mean 'most Turkish of the Turks' or 'pure-blooded Turks.'Again, he cites Barthold as holding the etymology that is less likely.
From this revision:
The original text copy-pasted from a student’s thesis ( PDF link). It's not Vasily Bartold's work and it's not WP:RS. -- Wario-Man ( talk) 07:17, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
Turkmen are partly Iranian or Indo-European origin. My edit was recently removed so I want to point out this is not fringe theories. On the Armenians/Georgian of me claiming they were Iranians were possibly fringe since they aren't really linguistically Iranian but the ancient population of Turkmenistan are.
1)Turkmen Status within Iranian Ethnic Identity (Cultural, Geographical, Political) https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/234673757.pdf.
2)The source comes from that link. Also the history of Turkmenistand is inhabited by Indo-European Iranian tribes but are dissapeared today. /info/en/?search=History_of_Turkmenistan
3) The mtDNA study shows " Turkmens: Genetic studies show that the Turkmens are characterized by the presence of local Iranian mtDNA lineages, similar to the eastern Iranian populations "
Vamlos ( talk) 19:38, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
People of Turkmen ethnicity and people of Turkmen nationality are both referred to by the term "Turkmens". This conflation of ethnicity and nationality is also characteristic of other ethnicities and nationalities. The implications of these conflations for the primary topic of Wikipedia articles has been discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups#"Germans", "French people" etc - ethnicity vs nationality. This issue is also of relevance to our article on Turkmens. That leads to the question: What should be the primary topic of this article?
Krakkos ( talk) 15:50, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
We don’t have a separate article Dutch (middle ages) even though it used to refer to any Continental West Germanic language speaker, and even though Germans still call themselves by a variation of that name, for instance.We have a separate article of Franks and French people using the same name. Beshogur ( talk) 12:02, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
In the early 21st century, this ethnonym is still used by the Turkmens of Central Asia— [1] [2]the main population of Turkmenistan—Iran, Afghanistan and Russia, as well as Iraqi and Syrian Turkmens, the other descendants of the Oghuz Turks. "Turkoman", "Turkmen", "Turkman" and "Torkaman" were—and continue to be—used interchangeably. [3] [4]Furthermore, I can give you specific quotes that "Turkoman" is just the French version of Turkmen, regardless of whether it is used in English, see here
Some early scholars, beguiled by the French spelling "Turcoman"....
Bayram A ( talk) 11:39, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Turkmens were tradtionally called Turkoman in Western sources, this probably originates from Anna Komnene, a Byzantine princess and author of 11th-12th centuries. If we take some sources of 19th century and even 20th century, the Turkmens are still called Turkoman (Turcoman):
- Article "The Turcomans Between the Caspian and Merv" by Ármin Vámbéry published by Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland in 1880 ( http://www.jstor.org/stable/2841925)
- Book " The Great Game" by Peter Hopkirk. One of the chapters which talks about Turkmens of present-day Turkmenistan is called "The Last Stand of the Turkomans"
Here is the definition of Turkoman from Merriam Webster:
Turkoman noun Tur·ko·man | \ ˈtər-kə-mən \ variants: or Turcoman plural Turkomans or Turcomans Definition of Turkoman - : TURKMEN SENSE 1 – Turk·men | \ ˈtərk-mən \ plural Turkmen or Turkmens Definition of Turkmen 1a: a member of a group of Islamized Turkic-speaking pastoral tribes who beginning in the eleventh century expanded from Central Asia into Persia, the Caucasus, Anatolia, and Mesopotamia b: a member of a people descended from elements of these tribes who now form a majority of the population in Turkmenistan and a minority in adjacent countries 2: the Turkic language of the contemporary Turkmen people
History and Etymology for Turkoman: Medieval Latin Turcomannus, from Persian Turkmān, from turkmān resembling a Turk, from Turk
Bayram A ( talk) 11:39, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
References
Turkmens are NOT generally known as "Turkmen Turks", we are known only as Turkmens and historically were called Oghuz Turkmen. The article cites only Turkish sources which call Turkmen people as "Turkmen Turks", the article should either clearly say "also known in Turkey as Turkmen Turks" or not mention "Turkmen Turks" at all as it is relevant only to Turkey and this is Wikipedia's English language section.
Here is the definition of Britannica about the name of the Turkmens: "Turkmen (people). Alternative Titles: Turcoman, Turkmeny, Turkoman." - Turkmen (people)
Here is what the Big Russian Encyclopedia says about the name of the Turkmens: "ТУРКМЕ́НЫ (туркоманы; самоназвание – туркмен, мн. ч. туркменлер; араб., перс. терекеме, устар. рус. – трухмены, трухменцы, трухмяне) - TURKMEN (Turkomans; self-name - Turkmen, plural Turkmenler; Arabic, Persian Terekeme, obsolete Russian - Trukhmeny, Trukhmentsy, Trukhmyane). - Туркмены
Bayram A ( talk) 11:00, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
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) 15:55, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
The term Turkmen itself already contains the word "Turk".
https://tk.wikipedia.org/wiki/Türkmenler Google it, these are sources in Turkish by modern Turkish authors.
V.N.Ali (
talk) 01:15, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
See also here: "
Talk:Turkmens#Turkmen Turks?". Silent means consent?
V.N.Ali (
talk) 02:42, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
There should be serious Turkmen sources for such a self-name of ethnic Turkmens, and for the English name there should be reliable sources such as a review article in encyclopedias, scientific works. If nothing appears in the article on this topic during the current week, then I will hide both Turkmen and English with appropriate clarifications and I consider the sources of another related language to the self-names of Turkmens in Turkmen to be inappropriate.
V.N.Ali (
talk) 16:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
The article also mentions that name "Türkmen Türkleri" is said in the Turkmen language. This is not true, as in Turkmenistan we never say "Türkmen Türkleri", we just say "Türkmen" (in singular form) or "Türkmenler" (in plural form). PLus, there no reliable sources are provided in support of this statement. This should be corrected Bayram A ( talk) 10:45, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
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) 13:22, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Turkmens 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 Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Please do not replace the article with unwikified dumps of text grabbed from elsewhere. See Wikipedia:Copyrights and the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Thanks. -- Infrogmation 18:07, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The history of Iraqi Turkmens are not related with Ottoman Empire. They are descendants of Seljuks and Ilkhanates not the Ottomans. The given meaning of Turkmen as "Türk-men" (I am a Türk) is totally absurd. The way to say "I am a Turk" in Turkmen is "Men Türkem", "Men Türküm". In any of the Turkic languages from Siberian Yakut to Balkan Turkish the verb is always at the end of the sentence. The execptions that I know are Gagauz (Moldova) and Karaim (Lithuania).
http://ruhnama.info/ruhnama-en/kitap-htm/s10.htm -- Ga1taman 13:40, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Does the above paragraph really belong in this article? Seems inappropriate. SouthernComfort 01:06, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
The word "Turkoman" is combination of two words "Turk" and "Koman". Turk means strong and Koman might be corruption of "Cuman". The word "Cuman" might be corruption of word "Chemon" which means Cem, Kem, Kim, Chem, Khem peoples living around the globe. For example Kembojah, Khemr, Kama, Kamio, Kamen, Komnenos, Champas, Chamorro etc etc living as Arabs, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Shamans, Christians, Pagans and Muslims in almost all continents of the world. I beleive this word Kem/Cem/Chem takes its name from Biblical "Shem"(son of bibilical and Quranic Noah) being ancestor of Arabs and Hebrews(the most ancient peoples). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.71.190.49 ( talk) 05:20, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Do the Turkmen of central Asia and the Turkmen of Iraq really consider themselves to be part of a single ethnic group? Or do they consider themselves separate groups (admittedly under the larger umbrella of Turkic peoples) with the same name? -- Jfruh 23:02, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
(I'm an outsider editing adding a comment.) The one who added the article above, doesn't have any clue what he/she is talking about. He/she doesn't seem to know the difference between Turkish and Turkic. Turkmens and Turcomans of Iraq are NOT Turks. They are TURKIC peoples. Turks are relatively a young nation, on the other hand the history of Turkmens go back thousands of years. We dug finely worked ivory up in Turkmenistan hand made about 3500 year ago. Turkmens can't possible be Truks.
You have no ıdea eıther. they're all Turks. Turkıc ıs a synonym! But yes, Iraqi Turkmen ıs dıstınct. Half of them ıs sunni though.-- Bunifa88 ( talk) 21:45, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Just so everyone knows, I didn't just blank out the section. Tombseye 16:00, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
What does AH mean, as in 349 AH? What does it translate to in western time-keeping? What calendaring system is it, Islamic or Baha'i or Saka? 24.186.214.2 01:22, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Looking at Turkomen after the merge proposal, I thought they seemed like two different batches of people similarly named. Can anyone verify? They could be the same. Chris 07:17, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
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 21:13, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
What is so bad about this picture that it must need be removed from the article, where it had been happily sitting since April 2005? -- Lambiam 17:58, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
They had color photos back then you know and Russia was the place. This is an authentic color photo from the period, which is why it is still here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.99.241.102 ( talk) 00:31, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
I am a baloch of Iran.I have just heard about the turkmen baloch.Can any one tell where do they exist?and do they speak russian>Did any one(local) see them in Turkmenistan? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.96.229.85 ( talk) 11:53, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Türkmen Baloch refers to the citizens of Türkmenistan who are of Baloch ancestry, they are mainly found in the Merv Oasis of Türkmenistan.( ཧེ་དར - སྦལ་ཏི། ( talk) 18:05, 24 May 2022 (UTC))
"Turkmen" comes from the iranian word torkmand/torkman which in persian means "they became turk" ie they(the iranians of central asia)have been turkified "Turkmen" comes from the iranian word torkmand/torkman which in persian means "they became turk" ie they(the iranians of central asia)have been turkified.
john L.Drake —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.188.81.84 ( talk) 17:33, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
I wanted to mention to the picture about Major Ethnic Groups of Iran, Turkmens are in a vast area in iran, also azeries and qashqai, the government of iran wants to show that Turkic people in iran are so less, persian and kurds are more ! -- Snake co1 ( talk) 07:29, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Please take a look at the portraits in the top right corner of " Azerbaijani people" (or any other good article about an ethnicity). It shows a representative selection of ethnic faces, not just the current president. Yceren Loq ( talk) 22:49, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article,
File:Turkmen0012.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at
Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 18:54, 15 January 2012 (UTC) |
The article claims that the Turkish term "Yörük" used for Turkish nomadic or semi-nomadic groups in Anatolia and Balkans has phonetic variations Iirk, Iyierk, Hiirk, Hirkan, Hircanae, Hyrkan and Hyrcanae. This information is quoted from a Russian publication, which is unaccessible online and the name Hyrcania was, furthermore, the ancient name of a region between current Iran and Turkmenistan, whereas the etymology of the word "Yörük" is generally thought to be derived from the Turkish verb "yürümek" (to walk). http://books.google.cz/books?id=q_189OeDwSMC&pg=PA859&lpg=PA859&dq=Yörük Is there any further evidence for the existence of those phonetic variations mentioned in the article? Ayazid ( talk) 17:06, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Instead of calling other editors ignorant and edit warring, Siktirgitir should bring sources to support his opinions. The referenced information he is changing does not state parthian. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 19:00, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
I seems as I told before on your site that you are little informed, if you read barthold turkestan down to mongol invasion, rene grousse, steppe empires, cambrigde history of iran volume 3, The Cambridge History of Iran Volume 3: The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanid Periods, Part 1 ,The Cambridge History of Iran Volume 3: The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanid Periods, Part 2 ,
also in swedish, bra böckers världs historia, which means good books world history its like a encylopedia of the world history of mankind,
also the bonniers världs historia del 3, bonniers world history part 3 the parthians and sassanid era in iran, in swedish,
I have tones of references, its just some of I have read, I have gumaliev, wilhem radloff, thomsen, otto von maenschlefen,
I dont remember their books,
ce bosworth, bosworth american historian or english , unesco historical background of central asia, part 2 or three I dont clear remember,
peter golden, different books, faruk sumer , turkmenler oghuzlar book, the problem is that I dont remember all the books entitlements,
Peter golden is a major in iran and turkic and middle eastern history,
I have read minorsky, but he is not a good source, you feel more stupid than smart when you come out reading him,
ariminus vambery the jewish hungary , traveles thruth central asia or something the book was called,
I got reference from cambrigde history of iran volume 7 from nadir shah to the islamic republic, a statistics showing the rapid developent of irans economy from irans central bank and IMF , internationl monetary fund,
I have lots of lots of more the the bra böckers enclyocpedia , the whole bonniers, world history encholpedia, whole cambrigde of iran volumes , thought I dont remember everything, It was some years ago, the uzbek historian baya something, he died some years ago, and tatar valid tokan or something dont remember his name either, I have many many more source so please dont say I dont have any source, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siktirgitir ( talk • contribs) 23:29, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
The historian and books I mentioned is actuall books I have read, as I said on your page I dont know how to add source, and further notice, I havent seen at wikipedia, state pages of books, but if you want that , Ill do it to , you only make wikipedia a worse tool of knowlegde by removing , you are not adding any information, besides as I said you are little informed, since you didnt even know were the parthians lived, to me as a historian its a big error, anyhow, good luck by keeping wikipeida free from false information, and spreading false knowlegde, you are a hero to mankind, I admire your courage, If wikipedia had more talented like you than we would need no books, keep it up, --
Siktirgitir (
talk) 22:12, 4 December 2013 (UTC)siktirgitir
the tukmen ethnoloue report clearly reports as I have pointed out , they havent even checked it, its so stupid and ignorant, please can someone help me to this ignorant gentleman to see the true , they havent even checked the source and denies the source , how can you by so blind, please help other users, I dont have any other reverts since they have warned me because I said edward321 was deranged because he didnt read the source , I still hold to my opinion that the guy isnt fully aware of the source and there for not fully functional, as to vsmith and kansans bear seems to take sides and dont see the matter from an objective side, I have read the ethnologue report before and just clicked at the link and it confired what I edited , how can people be so blind, please someone with moral can they help me edit turkmen people article,-- Siktirgitir ( talk) 23:03, 14 December 2013 (UTC)siktirgitir
Public domain text on Turkmens
The Turkomans observe a difference between their children from Turkoman mothers, and those from the Persian female captives whom they take as wives, and the Kazakh women whom they purchase from the Uzbeks of Khiva. The Turkomans of pure race enjoy full privileges, while the others are not allowed to contract marriages with Turkoman women of pure blood, but must choose themselves wives among the half-castes and Kazakh captives.
As there exists a great animosity between the Yamuds and Goklans they do not intermarry, although they reckon themselves of equally noble lineage. The same hatred is extended to the Tekke Turkomans, whom the Goklans and Yamuds, moreover, look upon as their inferiors, being, according to their genealogies, the descendants of a slave-woman, whilst they are the posterity of a free-woman. (p. 71)
The more intimate connection of the Astrakhan and Kazan Tartars with the Mogols can be traced in their features; with the Nogay it is less visible. In like manner, the Turkomans further off in the desert, and the Uzbeks of Khive, have more of the Mogol expression than the Turkomans who encamp near the Persian frontier. The frequent intercourse of the Nogay, in latter years, with the Cherkess, seems to have improved their race; and notwithstanding the enmity that exists between the Turkomans and the Persians, it is still not unlikely that their close vicinity should have produced on the former a similar effect in a lapse of several centuries. The fact we have seen, that the Turkomans marry Persian women, when they take them as prisoners. The Turkoman women are, like the men, tall, and when young, well-shaped; their faces are rounder than those of the men; the cheek-bones less prominent; the eyes black, with fine eye-brows, and many with fair complexion; the nose is rather flat; the mouth small, with a row of regular white teeth. In a word, a great number of the younger part of the community might be reckoned as fair specimens of pretty women. (p. 73)
Bode, C.A. "The Yamud and Goklan tribes of Turkomania". Journal of the London Ethnological Society, vol. 1, 1848, pp. 60-78.
Page 210
Page 212
Rajmaan ( talk) 05:19, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
articles on all Turkic-related topics in Wikipedia seem very confused, and subject to a lot of nationalist propaganda. The Turkmen of Iraq and Syria are of an entirely independent ethnicity than the Turkmen of Turkmenistan (or the Turks of Turkey for that matter!) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.188.124.37 ( talk) 20:48, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
There were recent moves made on the proposal:
– And many similar articles which, on the same president, I would like moved - as would apply to all demonym based population describing articles in those cases those cases in which the plural form of the demonym differs from the singular form of the word.
As per:
Albanians,
Americans,
Armenians,
Australians,
Austrians,
List of Bahranis,
Belarusians,
Bosnians,
Brazilians,
Bulgarians,
Lists of Cameroonians and
Canadians, ...
As per
WP:UCRN as demonstrated in searches in ...
Designations that seemingly should remain as "... people" as the demonym retains the same form when indicating either singulars or plurals: Bhutanese people, British people and Chinese people,
I think that this sets a precedent which, if appropriate, can be followed.
Greg
Kaye 11:41, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
This seems like a key phrase, but I don't see it defined anywhere. I don't know enough about it to know if its worthy of its own article, or a just a description here, but the lack of info hurts this article. 155.213.224.59 ( talk) 15:38, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
This has been said over and over again on this talk page, it seems, but nobody has arranged it. The very first line says: "This article is about the Central Asian ethnic group. For other related groups, see Turkmen." But then, the introduction states: " a Turkic people located primarily in Central Asia, in the states of Turkmenistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Afghanistan (...). Which is plane wrong, because the "Turkmens" in Iraq and Syria are definitely not part of the Central Asian people. They are not more related to Turkmenistan than any other Turk in Anatolia. But even in the infobox, Iraq and Syria do appear.
To clean this up is a huge work, but it should be done. Anybody around there to start doing it or to assist? Ilyacadiz ( talk) 14:25, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
This article is very confusing and providing insufficient or even false information. From the mid 900s until the First World War Turkmen or Turcoman was a synonym for Oghuz Turk. [1] Mustafa Kemal Atatürk wanted to end the Kipchak, Oghuz etc differentiation and therefore called his citizens simply 'Turks' after the First World War. The Oghuz Turks in Syria and Iraq did not go through this process initiated by Atatürk, and therefore still call themselves Turkmens. I think this is relevant information with the current situation in Syria and Iraq. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.114.182.240 ( talk) 12:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: no consensus. Reasonable arguments in opposition. Jenks24 ( talk) 04:33, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Turkmens →
Turkmen of Central Asia – Firstly, as requested by numerous Talk page participants, we really need to disambiguate Central Asian "Turkmen" from the "Turkmen" of the Near East, which are quite unrelated to each other, but regularly confused. The disambiguator could alternatively be added in parentheses, if that is preferred.
Secondly, in the majority of reliable sources I found, the plural form of the noun is "Turkmen", too, probably because "men" is already a plural form. This is also reflected by the article titles on
Iraqi Turkmen,
Syrian Turkmen and
Iranian Turkmen.
Both aspects should IMHO be exhaustively discussed first, before consistently implemented not just in the article titles but also in links and mentions within the text. --
PanchoS (
talk) 00:02, 3 December 2015 (UTC) Relisted.
Biblio
worm 20:57, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
Both user falsified [1], [2]. The estimate for Iran is 1-2% and both users falsified CIA data.-- 188.158.84.116 ( talk) 10:49, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
The Turkmens in Afghanistan are almost 2 Millions. The statistic 400.000 is from 1997 so i think it is Time to refresh it :D Actually theire are plenty other sources but they are in Persian or in Pashto or Turkmeni that is the English side i have found.
https://joshuaproject.net/people_groups/15654/AF — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prinsofpersia1999 ( talk • contribs) 11:21, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
In Afghanistan more than 6 million Turkmens living Oğuz Türkmen oğlu ( talk) 13:43, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
in iraq and syria there are signaficant turkmen population — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.44.29.248 ( talk) 03:52, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
You wrote wrong Turkmens are in Afghanistan maybe more than 6 millions why you wrote wrong please correct that Oğuz Türkmen oğlu ( talk) 13:41, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Turkmens. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:25, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
@ Hunan201p:, @ Manasam98:, I don't intend to involve myself too closely in this, but I just wanted to point out what our reliable source guidelines ( WP:SCIRS say about genetics sources, namely:
Respect primary sources
A primary source, such as a report of a pivotal experiment cited as evidence for a hypothesis, may be a valuable component of an article. A good article may appropriately cite primary, secondary, and tertiary sources. Use of primary sources should always conform to the No original research policy.
However, primary sources describing genetic or genomic research into human ancestry, ancient populations, ethnicity, race, and the like, should not be used to generate content about those subjects, which are controversial. High quality secondary sources as described above should be used instead. Genetic studies of human anatomy or phenotypes like intelligence should be sourced per WP:MEDRS.
So that this is clear, the guidelines describe the three types of sources as follows:
A primary source in science is one where the authors directly participated in the research. They filled the test tubes, analyzed the data, or designed the particle accelerator, or at least supervised those who did. Many, but not all, journal articles are primary sources—particularly original research articles. A secondary source is a source presenting and placing in context information originally reported by different authors. These include literature reviews, systematic review articles, topical monographs, specialist textbooks, handbooks, and white papers by major scientific associations. News reports are also secondary sources, but should be used with caution as they are seldom written by persons with disciplinary expertise. An appropriate secondary source is one that is published by a reputable publisher, is written by one or more experts in the field, and is peer reviewed. University presses and other publishing houses known for publishing reliable science books will document their review process. Do not confuse a scientific review (the article/document) with peer review (the activity).
Any sources being used on this article for information on genetics that do not meet this guideline are not RS and should be removed.-- Ermenrich ( talk) 13:01, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
Is there any reason why you can't mention it's Y-DNA aswell ? What is the reason for this exactly, please explain
DerekHistorian ( talk) 14:37, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
@ DerekHistorian and Hunan201p: Both of you should bring your concerns to talk page and solve it here. If you can't reach a consensus, ask for Wikipedia:Third opinion, Wikipedia:Requests for comment, or Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard. Same applies to other articles that you have reverted the edits of each other. -- Wario-Man ( talk) 13:01, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
@ Hunan201p: Your request at WP:RFPP for semi protection would not solve the dispute, and it would need further justification. I have fully protected the article for a week and any admin is welcome to alter the protection with no need for consultation. Warning to those who are editing: being right is not listed as an exemption from the WP:3RR edit-warring policy, and observing 3 reverts in 24 hours is not sufficient to avoid sanctions if engaged in a slow edit war. Please post a new section explaining what the problem with the disputed edit is, using simple terms that uninvolved people can follow. Ask for opinions at WP:RSN regarding any disputed sources. Ping me if further procedural information is wanted. Johnuniq ( talk) 05:58, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
This information has been removed, with the following edit summary: " Removed extensive POV using low quality references, as well a misinter0retation of a DNA study. WP:SYNTH." I think it is relevant and should be included.
A genetic study on the mitochondrial DNA ( mtDNA) haplogroups of a Turkmen sample describes a mixture of mostly West Eurasian lineages and minority of East Eurasian lineages. This most likely indicates an ancestral combination of Turkic and Eastern Iranian groups that the modern Turkmen have inherited and which appears to correspond to the historical record which indicates that various Iranian tribes existed in the region prior to the migration of Turkic tribes. Turkmens also have two unusual mtDNA markers with polymorphic characteristics, only found in Turkmens and southern Siberians. [1] [2]
References
{{
cite journal}}
: |archive-url=
is malformed: timestamp (
help)CS1 maint: url-status (
link)
Thoughts? -- Tobby72 ( talk) 15:56, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
Beshogur: you removed an inline cleanup tag with the explanation: "A nation is a stable community of people formed on the basis of a common language, territory, history, ethnicity, or psychological make-up manifested in a common culture. A nation is more overtly political than an ethnic group".
That's quite a broad definition. The only elaboration in the article refers to Soviet attempts to establish Turkmen national identity based on "a fixed territory and a common language", but it's not clear to what extent this succeeded. The "fixed territory" in this case would presumably be the present nation of Turkmenistan. So that would seem to be the nation in question. The use of nation in the lead section is therefore ambiguous, which is why I added the {{ explain}} tag. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 08:42, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
The haplogroup information and referannces can also be found in the Haplogroup Q-M242, right in the sections of Central Asia and Southwest Asia.
Haplogroup Q-M242 is commonly found in Siberia, Southeast Asia, Central Asia. This haplogroup forms a large percentages of the paternal lineages of Turkmens.
Grugni et al. (2012) found Q-M242 in 42.6% (29/68) of a sample of Turkmens from Golestan, Iran. [1] Di Cristofaro et al. (2013) found Q-M25 in 31.1% (23/74) and Q-M346 in 2.7% (2/74) for a total of 33.8% (25/74) Q-M242 in a sample of Turkmens from Jawzjan. [2] Karafet et al. (2018) found Q-M25 in 50.0% (22/44) of another sample of Turkmens from Turkmenistan. [3] Haplogroup Q have seen it's highest frequencies in the Turkmens from Karakalpakstan (mainly Yomut) at 73%. [4]
A genetic study on the mitochondrial DNA ( mtDNA) haplogroups of a Turkmen sample describes a mixture of mostly West Eurasian lineages and minority of East Eurasian lineages. Turkmens also have two unusual mtDNA markers with polymorphic characteristics, only found in Turkmens and southern Siberians. [5].
I see no reason why you can't edit any genetic information on Turkmen when every Turkic ethnic group has one (except for Turkmen). My edit recently got removed by editor User talk:Beshogur and accused me of being a sock in his edit summary, this is a serious accusation. Kezo2005 ( talk) 20:20, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
References
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link)
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link)
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: |archive-url=
is malformed: timestamp (
help)CS1 maint: url-status (
link)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I currently have a problem, the reason I used this template was because user and/or admin Ymblanter suggested I do so and that the page is protected. Due to the fact that user Beshogur had reverted my edit and claimed I was a sock [11] in 20 May 2020, that I had in response, made a talk page discussion and left a message on Beshogur talk page. [12]
I requested he make a sockpuppet investigation to prove my innocence, and the conclusion shows that I'm unrelated to any sockpuppet [13]. After 3 days, I still have not received any response from Beshogur in neither the Turkmen talk page or his personal talk page while he keeps editing other pages.
I already stated in the sockpuppet investigation that even if the banned sockpuppet WCF did indeed edit a similar genetic study he does not own any of the genetic material with multiple sourced references. I added some more genetic references which was from Haplogroup Q-M242, in the sections of Central Asia and Southwest Asia, which also mentions the Turkmen haplogroup genetics. Would someone please help me out on what I should do, thanks in advance. Kezo2005 ( talk) 19:18, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
@ TrynaMakeADollar: @ Beshogur: we need your opinion with editing genetics of Turkmen. I personally don't understand what's the exact problem. I believe we need to create concensus with others. the sources edited by Kenzo2005 are factual so have a look if there's any problem. I don't even if the ping are working properly. So I may send a message to the talk pages in case it doesn't work properly. Queenplz ( talk) 22:04, 25 May 2020 (UTC) @ TrynaMakeADollar: @ Shinoshijak: trying to ping again. I failed pinging TrynaMakeADollar. Even if I had fixed that template it mostly won't respond according after sign your post, Shinoshijak, I noticed you have not edited since 19 May. I don't know if you lacked interest in wikipedia or still using wikipedia but just can't find anything to edit yet but please give your opinion here. I really don't know who to ping. I searched for people to help me out. The editors I pinged previously either didn't respond, said they have no time, or din't understand the topic so told me to ask others for help. Queenplz ( talk) 22:49, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Queenplz ( talk · contribs) wants to offer a third opinion. To assist with the process, editors are requested to summarize the dispute in a short sentence below.
I would like someone to help me and Kenzo2005. So far I've pinged the other users since 4 days ago and they have not responded ( it could be the ping doesn't work) so I'm asking for a third opinion. Queenplz ( talk) 02:48, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
Kezo2005 I have deeply studied the genetics of Turkics, Indics and Iranics. Turkmens being Q in large numbers is true, you have further provided enough sources from studies too, go ahead and edit the page. -- Xerxes931 ( talk) 22:03, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
Claims are untrue and not backed up by some citations LordAgincourt ( talk) 21:54, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Have anyone realized that not even half of those persons in the first picture are Turkmen or related with Teke Turks? 46.114.3.237 ( talk) 18:14, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
Visioncurve, can you provide sources that mention any of these proposed etymologies that are more recent than 1930? One is even from the 1800s--obviously our knowledge of linguistics has advanced considerably since then. The most recent sources do not mention these derivations, suggesting that they are no longer held by linguists ( WP:AGEMATTERS) and thus are not wp:DUE on this page.-- Ermenrich ( talk) 16:17, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
their works have been reprinted zillions of times and are still used as primary source for citing necessary material in the relevant, modern booksthan you should be able to cite this use to support these etymologies.-- Ermenrich ( talk) 19:22, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
One may begin by reminding the reader that 'Turkmān' and 'Turkmen' are two forms of the same name, corresponding to two different etymologies. 'Turkmān', which appears frequently in Persian writing, was derived since as early as al-Birūni in the eleventh century from a supposed original Turk-mānind (lit. 'like a Turk'), the suffix being a Persian word; 'Turkmen', on the other hand, comes from Turk-men, the suffix a Turkic one for emphasis. The latter etymology has now generally been accepted.Boom: WP:RS/AC. The academic consensus is that Turk-men is an emphasized form of Turk. On Barthold we read the following in the footnote:
See Kellner-Heinkele, 2000, p. 682, for the two etymologies. The change in scholarly opinion is reflected in the fact that the Encyclopaedia of Islam in its first edition had the entry on 'Turk-mān', written by V.V. Barthold; in the second edition (2000) the entry is entitled 'Turkmen'.So there you have it, Barthold, lo and behold, is considered to have been wrong. What a surprise, considering he's been dead for 90 years.
The exact origin of the word Türkman has not been resolved. Some early scholars, beguiled by the French spelling "Turcoman," made the unacceptable suggestion that this word represented a compound of the ethnonyms Turk and Coman (that is, Kuman, a group of Kipchak Turks in eastern Europe). Other scholars feel that the formation Türk+man must mean 'resembling Turks,' and refer to the folk etymology suggested by contemporaries of the Oguz-Turkmen, including the Arab lexicographer Mahmud al-Kashgari who, in the 11th century, derived the word from Turk mānand, which means in Persian "These look like Turks." However, the most likely explanation of the word is that it is derived from the ethnonym Türk plus an intensifying element +man, which could mean 'most Turkish of the Turks' or 'pure-blooded Turks.'Again, he cites Barthold as holding the etymology that is less likely.
From this revision:
The original text copy-pasted from a student’s thesis ( PDF link). It's not Vasily Bartold's work and it's not WP:RS. -- Wario-Man ( talk) 07:17, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
Turkmen are partly Iranian or Indo-European origin. My edit was recently removed so I want to point out this is not fringe theories. On the Armenians/Georgian of me claiming they were Iranians were possibly fringe since they aren't really linguistically Iranian but the ancient population of Turkmenistan are.
1)Turkmen Status within Iranian Ethnic Identity (Cultural, Geographical, Political) https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/234673757.pdf.
2)The source comes from that link. Also the history of Turkmenistand is inhabited by Indo-European Iranian tribes but are dissapeared today. /info/en/?search=History_of_Turkmenistan
3) The mtDNA study shows " Turkmens: Genetic studies show that the Turkmens are characterized by the presence of local Iranian mtDNA lineages, similar to the eastern Iranian populations "
Vamlos ( talk) 19:38, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
People of Turkmen ethnicity and people of Turkmen nationality are both referred to by the term "Turkmens". This conflation of ethnicity and nationality is also characteristic of other ethnicities and nationalities. The implications of these conflations for the primary topic of Wikipedia articles has been discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups#"Germans", "French people" etc - ethnicity vs nationality. This issue is also of relevance to our article on Turkmens. That leads to the question: What should be the primary topic of this article?
Krakkos ( talk) 15:50, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
We don’t have a separate article Dutch (middle ages) even though it used to refer to any Continental West Germanic language speaker, and even though Germans still call themselves by a variation of that name, for instance.We have a separate article of Franks and French people using the same name. Beshogur ( talk) 12:02, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
In the early 21st century, this ethnonym is still used by the Turkmens of Central Asia— [1] [2]the main population of Turkmenistan—Iran, Afghanistan and Russia, as well as Iraqi and Syrian Turkmens, the other descendants of the Oghuz Turks. "Turkoman", "Turkmen", "Turkman" and "Torkaman" were—and continue to be—used interchangeably. [3] [4]Furthermore, I can give you specific quotes that "Turkoman" is just the French version of Turkmen, regardless of whether it is used in English, see here
Some early scholars, beguiled by the French spelling "Turcoman"....
Bayram A ( talk) 11:39, 3 January 2021 (UTC)Turkmens were tradtionally called Turkoman in Western sources, this probably originates from Anna Komnene, a Byzantine princess and author of 11th-12th centuries. If we take some sources of 19th century and even 20th century, the Turkmens are still called Turkoman (Turcoman):
- Article "The Turcomans Between the Caspian and Merv" by Ármin Vámbéry published by Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland in 1880 ( http://www.jstor.org/stable/2841925)
- Book " The Great Game" by Peter Hopkirk. One of the chapters which talks about Turkmens of present-day Turkmenistan is called "The Last Stand of the Turkomans"
Here is the definition of Turkoman from Merriam Webster:
Turkoman noun Tur·ko·man | \ ˈtər-kə-mən \ variants: or Turcoman plural Turkomans or Turcomans Definition of Turkoman - : TURKMEN SENSE 1 – Turk·men | \ ˈtərk-mən \ plural Turkmen or Turkmens Definition of Turkmen 1a: a member of a group of Islamized Turkic-speaking pastoral tribes who beginning in the eleventh century expanded from Central Asia into Persia, the Caucasus, Anatolia, and Mesopotamia b: a member of a people descended from elements of these tribes who now form a majority of the population in Turkmenistan and a minority in adjacent countries 2: the Turkic language of the contemporary Turkmen people
History and Etymology for Turkoman: Medieval Latin Turcomannus, from Persian Turkmān, from turkmān resembling a Turk, from Turk
Bayram A ( talk) 11:39, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
References
Turkmens are NOT generally known as "Turkmen Turks", we are known only as Turkmens and historically were called Oghuz Turkmen. The article cites only Turkish sources which call Turkmen people as "Turkmen Turks", the article should either clearly say "also known in Turkey as Turkmen Turks" or not mention "Turkmen Turks" at all as it is relevant only to Turkey and this is Wikipedia's English language section.
Here is the definition of Britannica about the name of the Turkmens: "Turkmen (people). Alternative Titles: Turcoman, Turkmeny, Turkoman." - Turkmen (people)
Here is what the Big Russian Encyclopedia says about the name of the Turkmens: "ТУРКМЕ́НЫ (туркоманы; самоназвание – туркмен, мн. ч. туркменлер; араб., перс. терекеме, устар. рус. – трухмены, трухменцы, трухмяне) - TURKMEN (Turkomans; self-name - Turkmen, plural Turkmenler; Arabic, Persian Terekeme, obsolete Russian - Trukhmeny, Trukhmentsy, Trukhmyane). - Туркмены
Bayram A ( talk) 11:00, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
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) 15:55, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
The term Turkmen itself already contains the word "Turk".
https://tk.wikipedia.org/wiki/Türkmenler Google it, these are sources in Turkish by modern Turkish authors.
V.N.Ali (
talk) 01:15, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
See also here: "
Talk:Turkmens#Turkmen Turks?". Silent means consent?
V.N.Ali (
talk) 02:42, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
There should be serious Turkmen sources for such a self-name of ethnic Turkmens, and for the English name there should be reliable sources such as a review article in encyclopedias, scientific works. If nothing appears in the article on this topic during the current week, then I will hide both Turkmen and English with appropriate clarifications and I consider the sources of another related language to the self-names of Turkmens in Turkmen to be inappropriate.
V.N.Ali (
talk) 16:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
The article also mentions that name "Türkmen Türkleri" is said in the Turkmen language. This is not true, as in Turkmenistan we never say "Türkmen Türkleri", we just say "Türkmen" (in singular form) or "Türkmenler" (in plural form). PLus, there no reliable sources are provided in support of this statement. This should be corrected Bayram A ( talk) 10:45, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
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) 13:22, 31 January 2023 (UTC)