Template talk:Early Turkic Khaganates

Possible Turkic khaganates
Xiongnu, mentioned in Chinese sources, were possibly of Proto-Turkic or Turkic origin (disputed) and are proposed as the possible ancestors of the Huns (who may have been Turkic, but whose language remains oghuric (disputed)). Tiele of Xueyantuo, mentioned in Chinese sources that were a Tiele tribe, related to the earlier Dingling people, who emerged after the disintegration of the Xiongnu confederacy (they were at one point vassals of the Göktürks, later aligning with the Tang dynasty against the Eastern Göktürks). The language or languages spoken by the Avars are not fully clear. Classical philologist Samu Szádeczky-Kardoss states that most of the Avar words used in contemporaneous Latin or Greek texts appear to have their origins in possibly Mongolian or Turkic languages. Other theories propose a Tungusic origin. According to Szádeczky-Kardoss, many of the titles and ranks used by the Pannonian Avars were also used by Turks, Proto-Bulgars, Uighurs and/or Mongols, including khagan (or kagan), khan, kapkhan, tudun, tarkhan, khatun and khanum. 176.220.5.209 (talk) 20:22, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Imagery Options
The fisrt image that used was the Eugene Ferdinand Victor Delacroix Attila fragment, that was irrelevant for this article and template. The article mention about the early turkic history that is why the Imagery can be choose from tengrism or mythological subjects. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.2.8.149 (talk) 10:13, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Vandalism
Why someone should do this anyway. we are just improving the template, just like the other templates. we are taking arguments to talk page to argue about the lists. But you just keep moving with out any discussion @पाटलिपुत्र. really what was your reason to protect the template, vandalism? there Wasnt any vandalism in what we did, actually you restored anything that we improve. you protect the page against of yourself? please be respectful and restore to your own last change, the one that you deleted only the image. 95.2.9.125 (talk) 15:13, 19 August 2023 (UTC)


 * @पाटलिपुत्र 5.176.117.160 (talk) 15:48, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @पाटलिपुत्र bring the last edits back. You don't have any reason to protect the page. 95.2.8.212 (talk) 16:07, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Bring back the page to imageless version. 95.2.9.125 (talk) 16:11, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @पाटलिपुत्र Bring back the last version you own edited. The thing you did is such a vandalism. We are respectful you should be too. Bring back the improvements we did. 5.176.92.4 (talk) 16:16, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @Courcelles please be respectful and bring back the lastest edit version. we dont argue about the protection now. what is it? so turn the website off and dont let anybody to edit. 95.2.9.125 (talk) 18:29, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @Courcelles bring back the lastest edits. we improved it for the website. what are you doing with such templates? whats the problem? 176.220.16.184 (talk) 18:47, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 August 2023
95.2.8.221 (talk) 10:08, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

{{Documentation
 * content =

Usage
where  is either ,  , or.