User:Nawabmalhi/sandbox/Nawabmalhi: Answers to Jebenoyon

The edit discussed on the dispute resolution page and the edit I did recently are not the same at all and the recent edit was actually the compromise I was willing to do with Jebenoyon on the dispute resolution page when I said: Overall we are in agreement. The thing I agreed to was that I would not write that Barlas as a whole were Persianized, since the references that I provided on the dispute resolution were based off of the Timurids and Mughals (who are branches of the Barlas) and did not say the Barlas specifically.(even though all the references used in the Barlas article currently are related to the Timurids or Mughals). I this is what I told user Jebenoyon:

Dispute resolution Noticeboard:

1.The reason why Mdann said at first the sources were out of context were because they used Timurids and Mughals(a subset of Barlas) but later I explained to him that Timurids are part of the Barlas and his position changed

2.Then Jeneboyon argued that not all Barlas as a whole were persianized because only the Timurids were not the only Barlas

3. Then Mdann said that might be WP:SYNTH and I said I will not write Barlas are Persianized as a whole but it is important the only two Notable Subsets of the Barlas were Persianized which is undeniable historical fact and afterwards Mdann made a new proposed resolution where he said stop whining don't know why he purposesly uses the old one even though he got corrected by the admin.

My Edit:

1. Here is part of my edit with which Jeneboyon has contention with (different from dispute resolution):

2.Now I have not done WP:SYNTH since the sources I use directly use the Timurid and Mughals and meet required burden of proof.

3.My references are valid written by credible historians and I provide the page numbers and use Google books links a reliable way to search through millions of books so that people can look at the references.

4. I sticked to my promise to not write Barlas in general are persianized but instead I am very specific and willing to provide even more reliable Sources if needed.

5. Jebenoyon or Any other editor cannot just remove historical facts that are referenced clearly and then blame the other user for disruptive edits

Why is it Important to mention the Timurids and Mughals persianization?

Now the disagreement between me and Lysozym is whether this verifiable material should be on the page or not due to its relevence to the page. I believe it should be because although the Barlas were an ethnically Turco-Mongol trible the two great clans of the Barlas(all references on Barlas article based off Timurids and Mughals) were ethnically Turco-Mongol but were persianized and an important part of the Persian Cultural fabric and were not just culturally Turco-Mongol which would be a generalization and Selective quoting because we would ignore almost every book on them were they are mentioned, explicitly, as persianized, persianate, part of persian cultural fabric, and/or patrons of Persian culture. This is relevant as long as you include the Timurids and Mughals on the page as removing it would make the page look 2D instead of the 3D with cultural identification.