Talk:Mongol invasion of Khorasan

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

Hazara legend[edit]

This is your first warning after you removed well cited content from the article for no legitimate reason. You cannot remove info on a whim or if you find it embarassing or uncomfortable. If you continue with your vandalism you will be reported to be blocked. 60.198.47.154 (talk) 23:27, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

60.198.47.154 (talk)

The legend should not be in the category of truth.--Shxahxh (talk) 23:51, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No one is saying it is truth. The paragraph is very specific in saying "A common belief, also held among many Hazara". The edit is well sourced and relevant to the article. Legend, or not, you have not provided a legitimate excuse for your mass removal of well sourced content. This is your second warning. 60.198.47.154 (talk) 01:15, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

60.198.47.154 (talk)

I can modify this article as editor although it has a source. Like other articles. False sources should be deleted. --Shxahxh (talk) 01:24, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have provided above the reasons why your removal is incorrect. You have not addressed my reasons. Wiki policy does not permit the removal of "legends" if they are well sourced and relevant. Many ethnic groups are founded on legends and their Wiki articles include these legends. As long as it is specified in the article that the "legend" is not established fact then there is nothing wrong or deceptive. 60.146.121.125 (talk) 01:44, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

60.198.47.154 (talk) You do not accept the reason. --Shxahxh (talk) 02:17, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I responded thoroughly to your claim "The legend should not be in the category of truth". 1) The "legend" is never presented as "the truth." 2) Legends are allowed for inclusion if they are presented as such and are well sourced — as provided in this case. 3) Similar legends appear for other ethnic groups. You must respond to these points to justify your mass removal. 60.198.47.154 (talk) 02:33, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not repeat your removal of this section again. This discussion should be kept here for future reference if the article runs into the same issue of the Hazara content removal. I am also going to revert your edits on the article because once again you have removed the paragraph while ignoring answering my above points. I am also undoing your other edits because they lack citations to support them. You have now received your third and final warning from me and any repeat content removal and i will report you for vandalism. 60.198.47.154 (talk) 13:49, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I repeat: Please do not remove this section again — it reflects poorly upon your case — especially since it is needed now since i am engaging in a third opinion here. 60.198.47.154 (talk) 23:10, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Response to third opinion request:
At a glance I see no issue with the text in question, and I agree with the IP editor: I don't think the text should just be removed from the article. The wording could possibly be tightened up, but in my view that's not a compelling rationale to remove it wholesale. Even if the legend is not true, we can certainly discuss how a group believes it. Of course, here we must be mindful of due weight. /wiae /tlk 23:19, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Military unit of 1,000 soldiers[edit]

The Mongol Military unit of 1,000 soldiers can not be Hazara's ancestors during 700 or 800 years ago. The current population of the Hazara people does not express this while about 62% of them are killed and displaced. The population of a village could be.

--Shxahxh (talk) 19:58, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]