Talk:Parni conquest of Parthia

Title
As an early editor of this page (the creator being gone), what do you think of the title? Parni looks like a Latin nominative plural to me (< Gr. Parnoi), so I would expect and prefer "Parnian conquest". But I see that in fact quite a few RS use "Parni" as an adjective, including the exact expression "Parni conquest of Parthia"! I've corrected this kind of thing on WP before, where a Germanic tribe's (plural) Latin name is used as an adjective (almost as if it were Arabic). I was about to correct this page when I decided to check that Parni could not be something other than a Latin plural. No dice, so I was quite surprised to see that it is used an adjectivel. I don't want to try being more correct than the experts on ancient Iran, but I find "The Parni were..." combined with "The Parni conquest..." jarring. Thoughts? Srnec (talk) 21:19, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I've never thought about it, but it's certainly an interesting thought. It seems like WP:RS indeed prefer to use simply 'Parni'. Three recent major sources (Reign of Arrows: The Rise of the Parthian Empire in the Hellenistic Middle East, The Parthians: The Forgotten Empire, and Early Arsakid Parthia (ca. 250-165 B.C.): At the Crossroads of Iranian, Hellenistic, and Central Asian History) about the Parthians (one of them by a leading expert, Olbrycht) also use 'Parni' only, no matter which sentence. I personally think that we should stick to the WP:RS narrative. --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:47, 26 December 2021 (UTC)