Talk:Turkic peoples

Hunters and gatherers

"Proto-Turkic speakers were potentially both hunter-gatherers and farmers"
NO! Really??!! Wow! And which culture started out on a different way? Ah, yeah! The Anglos were fishing-gatherers.
As the set of our teeth proves, WE ALL started out as GATHERERS.
In the western 'culture' the "hunter-gatherer" term refers to uncultured, backward, barbarian peoples. Now let us recognise that while these "hunter-gatherer" Turkic peoples were building Ur, Uruk, Kish etc the 'westerners' were still swinging on the three branches.
Thus, apart from it's political context it is a totally meaningless sentence so please delete it. And pls drop the western superiority attitude when rewriting this part.

Errors in statistics (demographics section)

There are far more Uzbeks, also there is a different number on the page "Uzbeks". Secondly, the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan hosts quite a substantial number of different Turkic ethnic groups so you might add this as well. Shawali187 (talk) 22:17, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. (bojo)(they/them)(talk) 22:19, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Hazaras of Afghanistan are Turkic too

hazara of Afghanistan are Turkic too. Afghanistan is originally a Turkic land but only a couple centuries (about 3 centuries) migrants from India currently day Pakistan migrated (pushtoons).. 110.175.175.211 (talk) 01:36, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Proposed citation - Religion: Religious conversions: Buddhism

Tengri Bögü Khan initially made the now extinct Manichaeism the state religion of the Uyghur Khaganate in 763 and it was also popular among the Karluks. It was gradually replaced by the Mahayana Buddhism. [citation needed] Citation source Page 210.

Helo, I propose the following source as a reference to the section mentioned. Demadrend (talk) 17:05, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 May 2024

Etymology: First known mention of the term Turk is from Heredotus Histories as lyrcae, and as Turcae in Pomponii Malae De situ orbis libri tres, Difference in Lyrcae and Turcae came from translation mistakes. Because in this two historians they desribed in the same location also information about Iyrcae and Turcae is similar. Kaan C3Iik (talk) 21:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Not done - WP:SYNTH with primary sources (WP:PRIMARY) and pseudo-history. --HistoryofIran (talk) 00:32, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Full quote of Joo-Yup Lee 2023

Here is the full quote from the book [1] by Joo-Yup Lee 2023 added by user Bogazicili (bold parts are missing):

The lack of a common identity or a collective sense of Turkic consciousness in the pre-modern Turkic world may perhaps be explained from the fact that the Turkic-speaking peoples do not all descend from the Türks of the Türk Qaghanate or any other single ethnic group. Extensive DNA testing of the modern Turkic populations informs us that they are a heterogeneous entity in terms of patrilineal descent. In other words, they do not descend from a common ancestral group.9 It should also be noted that even the early Turkic peoples, including the Tiele and the Türks, were made up of heterogeneous elements.10 Importantly, DNA studies demonstrate that the expansion process of the Turkic peoples involved the Turkicization of various non-Turkic- speaking groups. The “Turks” intermixed with and Turkicized various indigenous groups across Eurasia: Uralic hunter-gatherers in northern Eurasia; Mongolic nomads in Mongolia; Indo-European-speaking nomads and sedentary populations in Xinjiang, Transoxiana, Iran, Kazakhstan, and South Siberia; and Indo-European elements (the Byzantine subjects, among others) in Anatolia and the Balkans.11 This process was a multi-layered one in that the Turkic peoples or tribal unions containing Turkicized elements of non-Turkic origins also went on to Turkicize other non Turkic indigenous groups as they made their way into new territories. For instance, the Oghuz, a Turkic tribal confederation that inhabited the Aral and Caspian steppes in the ninth and tenth centuries CE and, in time, became intermixed with Iranic-speaking elements in Central Asia, went on, as Ottomans, to Turkicize various indigenous groups, including Armenians, Greeks, and Slavs, in Anatolia and the Balkans.

If we quote something, it must be in full context.

I request that the full quote is added the citation "44" (Lee 2023, p. 4), specifically the first bold part. If not, it gives the reader a misleading conception that there is a "heterogenous Turkic component" when it actually became heterogenous by not sharing a common origin and later contact events, as explained in the full quote. 178.115.235.178 (talk) 19:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

That information is already available throughout the article. For example, in Turkic_peoples#Physiognomy:

Lee and Kuang believe it is likely "early and medieval Turkic peoples themselves did not form a homogeneous entity and that some of them, non-Turkic by origin, had become Turkicised at some point in history."

The exact quote you suggested is 258 words, up from current 89 words quoted. The book does not have a Creative Commons licence. It's simply too long. See: Wikipedia:Non-free content. Bogazicili (talk) 18:21, 19 May 2024 (UTC)