User talk:Lysozym/Archives/2013/Feb

Disambiguation link notification for February 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mamluk, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Kipchak and Circassian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:42, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Timurid rulers
Some users add Urdu and Arabic to the Timurid-related articles (e.g. rulers). I think both languages are irrelevant and have no usage on those articles. One instance Ulugh Beg article (diff). Can you verify? Thanks. Zheek (talk) 14:47, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * While Arabic has some relevance, especially as the major language of religious instructions, Urdu is totally irrelevant since it did not have any important role in the Timurid empire. As late as during the reign of Aurangzeb in India, Urdu was still a relatively unimportant language. Persian was still the language par execellence while Chagatay used to be taught to the Mughal princess as a reminder to their Turco-Mongol origins. As explained by Shah Jahan, he did not know Chagatay very well and did not show any ineterst in it. The case was different with Aurangzeb who - as an quasi fundamentalist Sunni - did not want to identify himself with the "language of the Shia Safavids", that is Persian, and hence showed more interest in Chagatay, Arabic and Urdu, the "languages of the Sunni". This Shia-Sunni conflict is one of the main reasons for the decline of Persian in India, Central Asia and Anatolia. It is also the main reason why Persian in Central Asia and India is known as "Dari" and not "Farsi". --Lysozym (talk) 21:02, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * OK. So only Chagatai and Persian (and if another relevant and sourced language mentioned) should be used, right? Zheek (talk) 21:14, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes. Regards. --Lysozym (talk) 21:15, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Maps
Hi. Can you check these maps? I think none of them are based on reliable sources. Original works and full of errors: ,, , , , ,, . Thanks. Zheek (talk) 18:52, 11 February 2013 (UTC)


 * No need to check any further. All of these maps are unreliable and need to be deleted. Regards. --Lysozym (talk) 18:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Farsiwan
Thank you for your work on the Farsiwan article. --Bejnar (talk) 03:55, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kashgar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tibetan language (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:26, 25 February 2013 (UTC)