Talk:Kyrgyz people/Archive 1

Spelling
The article can't seem to decide on how to spell Kirghiz/Kyrgyz (nor can other articles (Kyrgyzstan and Kyrgyz language use Kyrgyz)). TimBentley (talk) 23:59, 30 March 2006 (UTC)


 * The 'gh' is the British spelling. The 'y' and 'g' standalone is the preferred Kyrgyz government transliteration. However publications still come out with not only those but Kirgis, Kirgiz... In Cyrillic it is Кыргыз, which would favor the 'y' spelling. Chris 01:00, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Weren't the kirgiz a Celtic people? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.194.225.164 (talk • contribs).


 * No. Khoikhoi 08:26, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

"related groups" info removed from infobox
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 23:35, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

tribal unions of Sakas and Usuns, Dinlins and Huns
To my fellow editors I want to copy the bibliography that Abramzon gives in the note to his statement about Kirgiz descent from tribal unions of Sakas and Usuns, Dinlins and Huns:


 * A.N.Bernshtam: 1) Question of origin of Kirgiz people; 2) Arrival of Kirgizes in the Tien Shan in 9-10 cc.; 3) Archeological sketch of Northern Kirgizia. Frunze. 1941, p. 46 on; S.P.Tolstov, Primary problems of ethnogenesis of peoples in Middle Asia. In book: Soviet ethnography, 6-7, 1946, pp. 303-304; S. V. Kiselev, Ancient history of Southern Siberia. М., 1951; Yu. Zuev. 1) Term "Kyrkun". Question of ethnic origin of Kyrgyzes in Chinese sources. TII, issue 4, 1958; 2) Ethnic history of Usuns. Works of Hist., Arheol., and Ethnogr. Inst. of Academy of Sciences KazSSR, vol. 8; New materials on ancient and medieval history of Kazakhstan. Alma-Ata. 1960; S.M.Abramzon, Kirgizes. Soviet Historical Encyclopedia, vol. 7, page 277. (In Abramzon S.M. "Kirgizes and their ethnogenetical historical and cultural connections", Moscow, 1971, p. 423)Barefact (talk) 06:00, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Kyrgyz#Origins
The History of Kyrgyzstan article is about the history of the territory of Kyrgyzstan, not of the Kyrgyz themselves. While some info on their origins is relevant, the majority of the "Origins of the Kyrgyz people" section belongs in the Kyrgyz article, not in the History of Kyrgyzstan article. Otebig (talk) 21:54, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Image really from 1905-1915?
Is the image of the Kyrgyz family really from 1905-1915? That seems dubious, given the picture quality and original resolution. ask123 (talk) 14:13, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It's plausible. The photographer - Sergey Prokudin-Gorsky - was a pioneer of color photography and was taking photos like this at that time. Also, the color "imperfections" in this image (e.g. around the man's right eye) are consistent with his technique. The high resolution is not a problem: a 35mm photo scanned from the original negatives can easily be blown up to this size (or more). Finally, the photo is part of a collection purchased by the US Library of Congress from Prokudin-Gorsky's family. In other words, I think it's probably fine. ;) -- Hux (talk) 23:50, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Kyrgyz and Pushkin
There are many references of Kyrgyz in the novel The Captain's Daughter by the Russian novelist Alexander Pushkin published in 1836. However, Kyrgyzstan and the theater of war in Pugachev's Rebellion (which is the theme of the novel) are too far away. It is certain that Pushkin's Kyrgyz people are other Central Asiatic people like Kazakh. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 07:22, 11 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Indeed; as far as I remember, history books usually have a footnote saying that in the 18th through early 20th century, "Kirghiz" (киргиз) in Russian referred to the Kazakhs, while when the time came to talk about the Kyrgyz people as we know them, they were called "Kara Kirghiz". Vmenkov (talk) 13:35, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Is it confusion?
"Genghis Khan's oldest son Jochi occupied Kyrgyzstan without resistance." Is it confusion? To my uinderstanding, Jochi conquered Oin Irgen or those peoples who lived around Yenisey (approximately modern Tuva) without resistance. That may have included the Yeniseyan Kyrghyz, but not the modern territory of Kyrghyzstan. Gantuya eng (talk) 07:27, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Religion
In article it is said that Kyrgyz people are predominantly Muslims. But some users add Tengrism, Christianity, Shamanism in infobox as well, whereas there is no info about it anywhere. Can someone clarify the situation? Thanks, Ali-al-Bakuvi (talk) 07:30, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Related groups
Related groups - Russians?! Ali-al-Bakuvi (talk) 11:29, 6 May 2013 (UTC) Hello wikipedia contributors > I,m writing to you cause when I was reading a topic "Kyrgyz people" i found some > mistakes. In section "Related ethnic groups" it was Mongols and Tuvans that are > not related to Kyrgyz people. Mongols and Tuvans are different nations with > different culture and race. As you know Kyrgyz people are Turkic speaking people > and related to Turanian race (Mixed with European and Mongoloid race or Turanian > race). But Mongols and Tuvans related to Mongoloid race. Tuvans are also turkic > speaking people but genetically they are mongoloid and culturally they are > different. So please can you fix it. Mongolians and Tuvans are not related to > kyrgyz people. > Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Labrador840 (talk • contribs) 08:44, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Number
The number of Kyrgyz in Russia given as a census-2002 result (103,422) is a mistake. The census page gives 31,808. — 188.162.65.64 (talk) 19:13, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 August 2015
Kyrgyz people were neither Indo-European, nor does it have anything to do with the article.

Ztanislav (talk) 02:27, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.  Edgars2007  (talk/contribs) 17:58, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

I think it's ok, I just saw the ongoing discussion above. I think I will continue there. Thanks anyway. Ztanislav (talk) 14:23, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Indo-European Speakers
I was read on article "Haplogroup R1a1 (Y-DNA) is often believed to be a marker of the Proto-Indo-European language speakers." İt's a hypothesis, and not certain. I think it's a sided setence and should be remove. Yagmurlukorfez (talk) 15:08, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * What about the wording "often believed" (which you bolded yourself!) does not indicate that the connection is a hypothesis and not certain? *facepalm* Obviously you understand English well enough, why do you ask such idiotic questions? --Florian Blaschke (talk) 15:35, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Careful your language. Why did you remove the other sources? Your sided and nationalistic actions too obvious. Stop pushing your POV! Yagmurlukorfez (talk) 19:45, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * ps: The issue is obvious vandalism and insulted language. Wikipedia admins should be check this article and the user. Thanks.Yagmurlukorfez (talk) 20:25, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Comment User:Florian Blaschke did a right revert:. User:Su4kin falsified the source: []. There is no mention of Proto-Turkic in that source. R1a is an Europid haplogroup. It's a marker of Indo-Iranians and Slavs. R1a is not related to Mongoloids/Asiatics (Turks and Mongols). The source is OK, but User:Su4kin's edits and your comments are problematic, non-neutral and biased. It seems that you and him try to insert nationalistic POVs to this article and other articles. Do you really can't understand Florian's comment?! --59.13.178.210 (talk) 12:42, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree. He's a biased editor. --114.179.18.37 (talk) 12:15, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
 * It seems you know nothing about this topic. Please save yourself your personel opinions about me, su4kin or another users. If you don't know anything except legends (It's obvious) please stay out of the discussion. You just being problem. On the other hand, yes I checked that source and there is not metioned "ptoro-turkic" word (su4kin's source). But the new dna results (su4kin's source) decline this sentence: "Haplogroup R1a1 (Y-DNA) is often believed to be a marker of the Proto-Indo-European language speakers." r1a is not only marker of the Indo-European speakers. So information about the r1a is not certain and one sided. This must be corrected. [#.U3tYZ_l_tv4 Here] is the link of removed source.

And another newest dna research: [#.U3tZAvl_tv4 DNA Genealogy and Linguistics. Ancient Europe] this source mentioned "proto-turkic." (see especially: page 103 and 108) The information about r1a is pretty misleading and should be corrected. Thanks Yagmurlukorfez (talk) 13:03, 21 May 2014 (UTC) Kyrgyz people were neither Indo-European, nor does it have anything to do with the article. And as long there is no evidence for such a claim it should be removed from this page. Ztanislav (talk) 14:25, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid that over-reliance on one primary source is not good practice. The general trend of the evidence is that the Kyrgyz, exactly as stated in their founding story, are a mixed people. Abductive  (reasoning) 14:17, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for interests. But no one talking about kyrgyz peoples' "racial purity." Yagmurlukorfez (talk) 14:23, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * So, you are saying that R1a1 can't really be used as evidence for anything? Abductive  (reasoning) 15:10, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I'am not saying. Check the sources I lefted. R1a1 also called "kurgan genes." (see Kurgan hypothesis) For ex: "According to Alineli (2001) the Kurgan culture introduced Turkic, not Iranian..." [#.U3tZAvl_tv4 DNA Genealogy and Linguistics. Ancient Europe] Yagmurlukorfez (talk) 15:47, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * What is needed is a secondary source that frames the debate. Abductive  (reasoning) 18:06, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * That paper is arguing against Alineli, saying his theories are wrong on both genetic and linguistic grounds, Also, Alineli falls firmly in the fringe camp. Furthermore, it doesn't claim R1a1 is a sign of Proto-Turkic. It says that R1b bearers might have spoken Proto-Turkic...or Sino-Tibetan languages, or "Dene-Caucasian" (not a generally accepted family). Ergative rlt (talk) 02:56, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I already knew that. Ok. I didn't said "r1a1 is a proto-turkic." But also, r1a1 is not only marker of the IE speakers. I explained that. It's mean R1a1 is not belong to IE speakers. Yagmurlukorfez (talk) 13:03, 21 May 2014 (UTC))

Afghanistan
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/02/wakhan-corridor/finkel-text

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/02/wakhan-corridor/paley-photography

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/visions/field-test/pamir-mountains/dispatch-6

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/visions/field-test/pamir-mountains/dispatch-2

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/visions/field-test/pamir-mountains/dispatch-1

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/photo-contest/2012/entries/200090/view/

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/photo-contest/2012/entries/176391/view/

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/wallpaper/2013/february-ngm-wallpaper#/09-kyrgyz-nomads-wakhan-corridor-670.jpg

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/photo-contest/2012/entries/gallery/people-week-8/

14:49, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Related ethnic groups
Hello wikipedia contributors  I,m writing to you cause when I was reading a topic "Kyrgyz people" i found some mistakes. In section "Related ethnic groups" it was Mongols and Tuvans that are not related to Kyrgyz people. Mongols and Tuvans are different nations with different culture and race. As you know Kyrgyz people are Turkic speaking people and related to Turanian race (Mixed with European and Mongoloid race or Turanian race). But Mongols and Tuvans related to Mongoloid race. Tuvans are also Turkic speaking people but genetically they are mongoloid and culturally they are different. So please can you fix it. Mongolians and Tuvans are not related to kyrgyz people. Thank you in advance.

Proposal for the deletion of all the galleries of personalities from the articles about ethnic groups
Seemingly there is a significant number of commentators which support the general removal of infobox collages. I think there is a great opportunity to get a general agreement on this matter. It is clear that it has to be a broad consensus, which must involve as many editors as possible, otherwise there is a big risk for this decision to be challenged in the near future. I opened a Request for comment process, hoping that more people will adhere to this proposal. Please comment here. TravisRade (talk) 23:06, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * That is not an RfC and it doesn't follow the RfC process. It's just a collection of opinions and has no authority. Liz  Read! Talk! 23:15, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The RfC was opened correctly. please comment at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ethnic_groups. Dkfldlksdjaskd (talk) 09:30, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Kyrgyz people. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120117052317/http://ukrcensus.gov.ua/rus/results/nationality_population/nationality_popul1/select_51/?botton=cens_db&box=5.1W&k_t=00&p=25&rz=1_1&rz_b=2_1%20%20%20%20%20%20&n_page=2 to http://ukrcensus.gov.ua/rus/results/nationality_population/nationality_popul1/select_51/?botton=cens_db&box=5.1W&k_t=00&p=25&rz=1_1&rz_b=2_1%20%20%20%20%20%20&n_page=2

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 21:43, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Kyrgyz people. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120117052317/http://ukrcensus.gov.ua/rus/results/nationality_population/nationality_popul1/select_51/?botton=cens_db&box=5.1W&k_t=00&p=25&rz=1_1&rz_b=2_1%20%20%20%20%20%20&n_page=2 to http://ukrcensus.gov.ua/rus/results/nationality_population/nationality_popul1/select_51/?botton=cens_db&box=5.1W&k_t=00&p=25&rz=1_1&rz_b=2_1%20%20%20%20%20%20&n_page=2

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:45, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Kyrgyz in Tajikistan
Source for Kyrgyz in Tajikistan: Национальный состав, владение языками и гражданство населения Республики Таджикистан Том III — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.138.53.77 (talk) 09:13, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kyrgyz people. 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:
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/616BvJEEv?url=http://www.perepis2002.ru/content.html?id=11 to http://www.perepis2002.ru/content.html?id=11&docid=10715289081463

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:45, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Kyrgyz people. 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:
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20110724203805/http://24.kg/community/68134-za-poslednie-10-let-yetnicheskaya-struktura.html to http://24.kg/community/68134-za-poslednie-10-let-yetnicheskaya-struktura.html
 * Added tag to http://www.stat.uz/STAT/demografiya/1_axoli.xls
 * Added tag to http://92.46.60.130/open.php?exten=pdf&nn=760179
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160102190052/http://www.kyrgyz.ru/?page=75 to http://www.kyrgyz.ru/?page=75
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061015144217/http://www.silkroadproject.org/smithsonian/nomads/shamanism.html to http://www.silkroadproject.org/smithsonian/nomads/shamanism.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:22, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Turkic ethnic group?
The article opens with the phrase "Turkic ethnic group" without a reference. I thought there is no acceptable ethnic group called the Turkic ethnic group. There is however the Turkic language group/family. The peoples of Central Asia and Turkey speak languages belonging to the same language family, namely Turkic (which I believe is not a good name choice, given it gives the false impression that the languages' origin is in modern Turkey, wheres their true origin was in Central Asia), but these peoples are not related genetically/ biologically, except where the people's phenotypes display the result of cross-breeding. As the use of the term "Turkic ethnic group" in the article is not referenced to a reliable source, could it replaced by "Turkic language group"? 2A00:23C5:C101:5800:6444:2083:1474:E14D (talk) 15:44, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Kyrgyz people
In Article Kyrgyz people it says they speak Mandarin and related to Mongols and Chinese people.But Kyrgyz people Not related to Chinese and Mongol. Kyrgyz people inhabited in Enisey area and had R1A1 haplogroups and still have R1A1 within 63,5% of Kyrgyz population and share this haplogroup with Altai People, Hakas.Ishkashimi etc. Also 22% of Kyrgyz have C. As a race Kyrgyz Related to South Siberian Turanian race. So consequently Kyrgyz people related to Kazakh, Altai, Hakas, genetically and culturally and by language. Johnny3286 (talk) 10:17, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The Kyrgyz people are related to the Mongols because after the breakup of the Mongol empire, the Mongols adopted the customs of and became absorbed into the various ethnic groups of the region, one of which was the Kyrgyz. Meanwhile, the Kyrgyz are "related" to the Chinese people on the basis that around 145,000 Kyrgyz live in China, have Chinese nationality and comprise one of China's 56 officially recognized ethnic groups. (Note that the "related to" section on pages like this one doesn't solely imply genetic relationships.) Finally, some Kyrgyz people do speak Mandarin, i.e. some of that same group of 145,000 Kyrgyz in China. -- Hux (talk) 06:10, 1 June 2017 (UTC)


 * The article describe them as a 'Turkic' people. They are a Turkic people only in the sense they speak a Turkic type language, genetically and in appearance they are Mongoloids, and look nothing like Turks from Turkey. In fact if a Kyrgyz person dressed in modern clothing appeared in China, it would be impossible to say that he/she was not a Han Chinese; one would certainly not think that he/she was a Turk. To call the Kyrgyz a Turkic people would be like to call Black Americans English because most Black Americans now only speak a dialect of English. 86.145.35.196 (talk) 01:00, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

I will tell you the truth. Kyrgyz are turkic nation. Turks from the Turkey originally were mongoloids and they were from Central Asia. They mixed with balkan nations and became modern Turks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.165.22.253 (talk) 10:29, 3 August 2017 (UTC)


 * It is unlikely that the modern Turks were originally Mongoloids. It is however likely that modern Turks carry some Mongoloid DNA because their ancestors were conquered by Central Asians, and they became slaves or slave-like, and therefore had to change their language to the language of their masters, and some cross-breeding took place. This is like the situation of Black Americans whose ancestors were the slaves of whites and had to change their languages to that of their masters, so that now they only speak English. And as a population they may carry some "white" DNA due to cross-breeding. One of the earlier people of the country now called Turkey were the Hittites mentioned in the Jewish and Christian Bible. The language of the Hittite has been proven to be Indo-European, in an area dominated by the Semitic languages. One would at a guess assume the Hittites were in appearance very similar to other peoples of the area, ie Semitic/ Europoid, with dark hair and tanned skin coloration, and only their spoken language was different. The Hittite woman might have had whiter skin than the other people given that the Jewish King David saw a naked Hittite married woman and fell for her in a time when a pale skin was considered beautiful. 2A00:23C5:C101:5800:9DE2:10D5:3E2C:D8F (talk) 01:22, 7 August 2017 (UTC)


 * See http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4750460/Ancient-DNA-analysis-reveals-Minoan-Mycenaean-origins.html 86.145.35.196 (talk) 01:21, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Why don't you say that the Kyrgyz are a Kyrgyz people who are (still) Mongoloids, and the Turks in Turkey are a people derived from the Kyrgyz people and still speak a Kyrgyz language, but now call themselves Turks. Why do you Kyrgyz people want to be called Turkic when you were the origin people and came before the Turks who are derived from you? ie Kyrgyz and other Central Asian peoples first, Turks second. The Turks are descended from the Central Asians, not the other way round. 86.145.35.196 (talk) 01:31, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Well it shows that you are pretty ignorant in this topic. The term Turkic does not comes from the term "Turkish" or "Turkey". In 5th century AD, on the territory of Siberia there was a Turkic Khaganate and there were people who called themselves gok-turks. It was an ancient turkic nation and it might the probably the first Turkic state. Turkish people of Turkey originally called themselves Osmanli and their true ethnicity was Oghus. Central Asian turkic people are mostly kypchak (except Turkmen who are Oghuz as well) and they have decent amount of common with Mongolians. 60 percent of Kazakh and Uzbek tribes, 90 percent of Karakalpaks, 40 percent of Kyrgyz tribes have mongolian origins. Those tribes names are barlas, naiman, merkit, monoldor, sart-kalmak, konyrat, du(g)lat, katagan, urmaut, jalair etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.99.17.224 (talk) 03:40, 16 August 2017 (UTC)


 * 86.99.17.224 has a good point. "Turkic" is not "Turkish", and Turks are not ethnic Turks but Oghus, but they just want to call themselves Turks instead of Osmanli. Why can't people just call themselves for what they are instead of taking someone else's identity? Maybe they just want to confuse everyone. But remember, Turks are not really Turks. 2A00:23C5:C101:5800:C17D:948C:B624:5096 (talk) 20:48, 27 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Are you calling Turks (ie Turkey people) ignorant? Even recently leaders of Turkey (the country, not the bird) claim the turkic people in central Asia are their people. Central Asiatic people and modern Turks only share a common language root, and not DNA origin. It is the Turkey people who claim turkic means "of Turkey". To stop the confusion between the very similar terms Turk, Turkic, Turkey, linguists should change the language family name of turkic to Central Asiatic to reflect its true historic origin. The language of the people now living in modern Turkey came from Central Asia, not the other way round. The modern Turks now speak someone else's language and not the language of their DNA ancestors. They are of the same position as the Black people of the USA who speak English and not African languages. The original language of the area was Hittite, which was an Indo-European language. 2A00:23C5:C101:5800:6DE1:577B:3C57:DE81 (talk) 19:40, 20 August 2017 (UTC)


 * It is a pity and a shame that linguists have decided to call this language family "turkic", and the country succeeding the Ottaman empire calling itself "Turkey" resulted in more confusion. To the uninitiated, it appears that the "turkic" languages began in Turkey and then spread to Central Asia, whereas in fact the "turkic" languages are Central Asian languages, which spread to modern Turkey. It would be far better if linguists renamed "turkic" to "Central Asiatic" to reflect the true history and origin of this language family. Thus the modern Turks speak a "Central Asiatic " language, rather than Central Asians speaking a "turkic" language. After all, one would not or should not claim the modern country Turkey was named after a bird called turkey that is native to north America and used for food. 2A00:23C5:C101:5800:9DE2:10D5:3E2C:D8F (talk) 01:41, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Can you call Black American people (African-Americans) an English people because they only speak dialects of the English language, and not any of the known sub-Saharan African languages? 86.145.35.196 (talk) 01:51, 4 August 2017 (UTC)


 * No, Black Americans are Negroid peoples who now speak English. And modern Turks (Turkish people) are a mixed Europoid/Semitic people (by DNA) who speak a central Asian language. And the Kyrghiz people are a Mongoloid people who speak a central Asian language, which linguists call "turkic". 2A00:23C5:C101:5800:9DE2:10D5:3E2C:D8F (talk) 02:07, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

This section is a pure forum-like entry. Read WP:FORUM before posting any comments on talk pages. --Wario-Man (talk) 03:45, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Kyrgyz people. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.stat.uz/STAT/demografiya/1_axoli.xls
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.perepis2002.ru/content.html?id%3D11%26docid%3D10715289081463
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061207121421/http://expat.nursat.kz/?3245 to http://expat.nursat.kz/?3245

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:45, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Kyrgyz and Indo Iranics
Kygryz were described as mixtures between Indo-Iranics/Europeans due to their blue/green eyes and blond/red hair. The genetics of modern Kyrgyz undoubtedly prove that they were descended from Indo Iranics, but the same is true for other Turks and similar people. The Ashina clan carried the same European R1a-Z93 as Kyrgyz. Their descendants the Khazars were described as blond/blue eyed, the Gökturks used IE written language, and the Muqan Khagan of the Gökturk Empire had the same Europoid features that the Kyrgyz in this article are described as having. Several Xiongnu are described in ways by Chinese authors that make them sound European, and Europoid graves related to Xiongnu have been extensively documented. 2/3rd of all Turks today carry Y-DNA haplogroups R1a, J2, G, etc -- all associated with Indo European or Indo Iranic people, as well as IE/II mttDNA lineages in amounts of up to 48%. R1a/B and J have even been found in an elite Mongol necropolis. Finally, Indo European or Iranic loanwords are rife in every Turkic language and even the very word "Turk" has possible IE origins. Describing Turks as a replacement is inaccurate and misleading. Turks are an ethnogenesis.

Hunan201p (talk) 19:20, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 May 2019
User AsadalEditor inserted a sentence without a source. His populist edits created the same bad quality in other articles. TitansOfAzeroth (talk) 22:30, 7 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Done as it seemed like a possible synthesis, although nothing wrong with reinserting while mentioning whose hypothesis this is. – Þjarkur (talk) 23:06, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Removal of material added by WorldCreaterFighter
I removed material added to this article a while back by WorldCreaterFighter (AsadalEditor, the individual mentioned in the above section), recently reverted by Tobby72. Although it is tedious to explain myself over and over again, the references cited do not support the statements made by AsadalEditor. In several instances the references also fail WP:SCIRS, such as a travel guide, non-peer reviewed Nazi science, a Turkish nationalist source, etc. If they are anywhere else in the article they should be removed.

Material removed:

The early inhabitants of modern Kyrgyzstan were described in Tang Dynasty texts as having "red hair and green eyes" and are generally linked to non-Turkic, possibly Tocharians|Tocharian populations,-->https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/35125682.pdf|title=Blue eyed and blonde tribes in ancient Central Asia|last=Jettmar|first=Dr. K|date=|website=|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=}} ... In Chinese sources, these tribes were described as fair-skinned, green- or blue-eyed and red-haired people with a mixture of European and East Asian features. They were later assimilated by the Turkic-Kyrgyz.Laurence Mitchell,—>https://books.google.com/books?id=HZbOBPoTGfUC Kyrgyzstan: The Bradt Travel Guide], 2008, p. 7.Carter Vaughn Findley, —>https://books.google.com/books?id=bdZbe3zOz_MC The Turks in World History], Oxford University Press, 2004, p.118.Sergei A. Yatsenko, In: The Turks: Early ages, Wu-Suns pp.244–249, 2002.Egon Eickstedt (Freiherr von), '—>https://books.google.com/books?id=ykgRAQAAMAAJ Rassenkunde und Rassengeschichte der Menschheit], F. Enke, 1934, p.264.—>https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/35125682.pdf|title=Blue eyed and blonde tribes in ancient Central Asia|last=Jettmar|first=Dr. K|date=|website=|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=     - Hunan201p (talk) 04:51, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Well these people at the first place didn't live in Kyrgyzstan during Tang period. Beshogur (talk) 10:02, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

image date .......
Image really from 1905-1915? Is the image of the Kyrgyz family really from 1905-1915? That seems dubious, given the picture quality and original resolution. ask123 (talk) 14:13, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It's plausible. The photographer - Sergey Prokudin-Gorsky - was a pioneer of color photography and was taking photos like this at that time. Also, the color "imperfections" in this image (e.g. around the man's right eye) are consistent with his technique. The high resolution is not a problem: a 35mm photo scanned from the original negatives can easily be blown up to this size (or more). Finally, the photo is part of a collection purchased by the US Library of Congress from Prokudin-Gorsky's family. In other words, I think it's probably fine. ;) -- Hux (talk) 23:50, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The first 35mm film/camera was not available until 1924/25. Something's wrong with the provenance on this photo.50.111.19.2 (talk) 14:07, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Discussion on what the primary topic of this article should be
People of Kyrgyz ethnicity and people of Kyrgyz nationality may both be referred to as "Kyrgyz people". 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. This issue is also of relevance to our article on the Kyrgyz people. That leads to the question: What should be the primary topic of this article? Krakkos (talk) 15:48, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * People of Kyrgyz ethnicity
 * People of Kyrgyz nationality (i.e. people with Kyrgyz citizenship)
 * The term "Kyrgyz people" itself (per WP:WORDISSUBJECT)
 * There is no primary topic for the term "Kyrgyz people"
 * Something else (feel free to elaborate)
 * Kyrgyz is not plural. It could be Kyrgyzes but I doubt if that's widely used. Beshogur (talk) 16:44, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the correction, Beshogur. As a remedy, I have made some tweaks to the RfC. Krakkos (talk) 16:55, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Minority faith Tibetan Buddhism? Doesn't seem right
I know that there are numerous sourced, but I clicked the source and there's no mention of Tibetan Buddhism. Can anyone reply to me and quote where they mention it? There are Kyrgyz who were descendant of Kalmyk, but they're all Muslim now. Also, out of 3,257 religious organisations registered in Kyrgyzstan, only one organization is Buddhist, which is from the Korean minority. It's very unlikely that there is a community of Kyrgyz people following Tibetan Buddhism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OghuzDynasty (talk • contribs) 18:15, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 March 2021
May I please edit because someone messed up the Infobox? I am fixing the infobox, that's it. 71.195.20.108 (talk) 02:02, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. ◢  Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 03:10, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 January 2022
86.16.89.112 (talk) 12:40, 28 January 2022 (UTC) Notable Kyrgyz People: Valentina Shevchenko - Current UFC Women's Flyweight Champion
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:43, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ Actually, looks like this is correct. Added to list. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:46, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

How is it possible that Valentina Shevchenko can be a Kyrgyz? She is Ukrainian and also stated as Russian ethnicity living in KyrgyzstanDomsta333 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 08:52, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Please add ..
2603:7000:2143:8500:CC9D:3A8:A20B:4199 (talk) 01:50, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Denis Petrashov (born 2000), swimmer


 * Looks like an ethnic Russian. Is it? Beshogur (talk) 11:23, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 January 2023
create a section stating the (most) related ethnic groups, possibly noting about their race and phenotypes but preferably noting those most genetically (based off of the content of this page and mot necessarily other sources) and historically to them, preferably by creating a blank section, changing the name from blank space to related ethnic groups, adding an area to write, changing the area from blank space to the karakalpak, kazakhs, kipchaks (other ethnicities, from the ancient and modern ones), then the nogais, alongside certain ancestor based groups such as the sarts, the original inhabitants, not the recently arrived group. other considerations including more research can be made but it’s not necessary, due to my suggestions. change the article to include a section for the related ethnic groups, being whom i listed 2601:19B:C501:E330:397C:6078:EBFE:F262 (talk) 00:23, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. If you have specific text in mind, along with appropriate supporting sources, feel free to post it here and reopen the request then. Nonspecific requests like this one are outside the scope of an edit request. Cannolis (talk) 00:43, 12 January 2023 (UTC)