Talk:Tuqaq/GA2

GA Reassessment

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

• As a discussion at the talk-page (transcluded below) attests to, most of the content is either not verifiable or misrepresentation of source. This violates criteria 2. TrangaBellam (talk) 15:22, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

  I had provided a chance to the nominator to correct course but things have not improved. TrangaBellam (talk) 15:24, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

• I had added additional sources on 25 October 2021 and there is not misrepresentation. The concepts were thoroughly reformulated, avoiding close paraphrasing, structure, and presentation according to WP:Copy. Wikipedia guidelines also state that phrasing of the information should be contributor's own original creation.--Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 10:00, 26 October 2021 (UTC) Visioncurve is the orig. nominator.

• there is not misrepresentation - There is a t/p discussion, where you can argue. TrangaBellam (talk) 10:34, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Misrepresentation of sources

@QatarStarsLeague and Visioncurve: - Please address the tags (which were added by me) and provide inline citations with quotes. TIA, TrangaBellam (talk) 14:06, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Visioncurve, when you are removing failed-verification tags, please provide the exact quotations. Else, I will be compelled to reinsert the tags.

Dani, Ahmad (1992). History of Civilizations of Central Asia concerns The dawn of civilization: Earliest times to 700 B.C. Unsurprisingly, p. 146 is from a chapter about Food Producing Communities in Pakistan and Northern India and has nothing about our subject.

Even assuming that you were intending to reference p. 146 of Bosworth/Asimov's Vol IV (2000), I do not see any purpose. Please quote the line.

As a sort of drive-by comment, the Dani source is in seven volumes, so presumably the editor cited this one that covers the period "A.D. 750 to the end of the fifteenth century". Parsecboy (talk) 17:17, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Good to see Peacock (2015) about the origins of Tuqaq/Seljuqs but you are mispresenting him and adding details, he never provided.

Where does he discuss the collapse of Khazars, and Tuqaq's alliance with the Oghuz Yabgu State? Please quote the line.

Peacock (2015), pp. 33–40 concerns the fall of Ghaznavids before Seljuqs. Where does he note the legacy of [Tuqaq's object[ion] to their policy of raiding other Turkic tribes as a mitigating factor in their successful challenge - quote the line?

If anything, Peacock (p. 35-36) notes Seljuqs to have made repeated offers to the Ghaznavids about raiding fellow tribesmen, and preventing them from gaining any foothold. With waning Ghaznavid power, they even executed raids to these effects.

In Muharram 428/November 1036, they [Seljuk leadership] sent an embassy [to Masʽud I] demanding greater prizes [...] The offer of keeping out other, less desirable groups of Türkmen was repeated.

he left the Oghuz Yabgu State [..] refused to pay taxes to the Oghuz Yabgu State.. is not making any sense.

They never left the state but migrated to the frontiers. The reality was quite complex, that you fail to portray (Peacock_2015; p. 25 ):

Jand was the heart of an Oghuz principality which was a vassal of Khwarazm, the northernmost Muslim province in Central Asia. Khwarazm, ruled by the Ma’munid dynasty, was itself theoretically subject to the Samanid state (204/819–390/999) that dominated Transoxiana and Khurasan.

How is Peacock (2013), pp. 27-33 supporting, It is known, however, that Tuqaq had a far-reaching feud with the ruler of the Oghuz Yabgu State when the latter assembled a formidable army against neighboring Muslims. This most probably means that at the latter stages of his life, Tuqaq adopted Islam.? Please quote the lines.

Peacock (p. 30) writes,

The elements regarding the Yabghu’s invasion of the Islamic lands are clearly a later addition from a common source.

[S]ometime in the intervening period, a variant text of the Maliknama must have come into circulation. The new text clearly aimed to associate the Seljuqs with Islam from the earliest times, even before they had converted, and so had a legitimatory purpose. It is tempting to suggest that the Seljuqs themselves were closely involved with the decision to rewrite their early history.

At some point, perhaps in the later eleventh or twelfth century, the Khazar connection was felt to be no longer relevant or perhaps even desirable, and a revised version of Seljuq origins was circulated. In this the Khazar ruler became simply the king of the Turks and the story of Duqaq’s attempt to prevent him attacking the Muslims was inserted. Finally, by the late twelfth century, any mention of the early history of the Seljuqs was banished from Seljuq historiography [...]

Bosworth (2011; p. 18; ed. C. Lange & S. Mecit) writes,

Tuqaq is said [...] to have quarreled with the Yabghu over the launching of raids on the Muslims of the Oxus- Syr Darya region – clearly a back projection of the later role, in the later 11th and the 12th centuries, of the Islamised Seljuqs as foes of the still pagan Oghuz of the steppes.

Cahen (1949) writes,

le role de Dukak comme defenseur de Musulmans n'est lui, sans doute, que la projection dans le passe de l'attitude adoptee plus tard par ses descendants

Tuqaq Temur Yalig is not the full name of Tuqaq - I had missed this gem. In Maliknama, he is given the sobriquet of Temür Yalïgh (Temur Yalig), corresponding to "iron bow".

Laissant de cote les prolongements introduits par des genealogistes complaisants, nous trouvons comme ancetre des Seljukides, selon le Maliknameh, Dukak, surnomme Timur-Yaligh, arc de fer.
— Cahen, Claude (1949). "Le Malik-nameh et l'histoire des origines seljukides". Oriens. 2 (1): 31–65. ISSN 0078-6527.

Tuqaq's father's name was Kerequchi, who was either a popular local blacksmith or a master of tent-making (yurts). is unsourced and wrong (as it stands).

Peacock (2010, p. 30) writes,

[..] the genealogy tracing Seljuq’s descent back to one Karakuchı Khwaja, a maker of tents for the Turkish Khans, clearly does not derive from Nıshapurı as Agadzhanov thought. It is almost certainly an Ilkhanid invention, perhaps designed to denigrate the prestige of the Seljuq family.

Early medieval sources state that Tuqaq was involved in the military of the Oghuz Yabgu State.

As Peacock (2010) shows, they state a variety of things about our subject with little agreement in content.

TrangaBellam (talk) 07:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

They have all been duly addressed: several statements were supplied with additional sources and minor corrections were also made. Contributors are not obligated to meet your every demand and modify content according to your subjective opinion. If you think there's a mistake or certain statements need improvement, go ahead and edit them (don't forget to add decent sources, of course), and contribute to Wikipedia in a more positive way instead of posting blocks of messages in this and several other talk pages. --Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 11:55, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

You are obligated to meet WP:INTEGRITY which is a policy and stands violated at every alternate line. You have not addressed a single issue of the many, I raised.

@HistoryofIran: - Any suggestions? TrangaBellam (talk) 14:02, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Delisting in 48 h. TrangaBellam (talk) 15:30, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.