Template talk:Kurds

message: I added Mannaeans to the history section of the template. The reason is that the center of Mannaean Kingdom was in Mahabad, a Kurdish city in western Iran, which is part of the geo-cultural region of Kurdistan.
Heja Helweda 19:24, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True, but I prefer the template include history of Kurds rather than history of Kurdistan; for if we talk about history of Kurdistan then we must add thousands of other peoples or invaders who inhabited Kurdistan. therefore I suggest to remove Mannaeans. Awat 09:19, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A surprising mistake which here can be asked is that why Medes and Parthians are excluded?? They both spoke northwestern Iranic as Kurds do. In my oponion Kurds can have a better claim for these two than Persians (southwestern Iranic-speaking) do. Why should Kurdish historians give them up to others? Is it wrong to have some common history/ties with Persians?Awat 09:54, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For Medes I agree, however I have not seen any evidence for Parthians being close to Kurds. In fact Parthians originated in northeast of Iranian plateau. For Mannaeans, in fact the Manna/Mannai tribe is considered as an ancestor of Kurds.Heja Helweda 22:10, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well not all Parthian population became Kurds, but Kurds have a significant Parthian heritage. Parthians although in some cases had wars with Kurds, but seem to be among the most friendly Iranic peoples (unlike for instance Persian Sassanids). Indeed Strabo has refered to Parthians as Corduchi! Awat 23:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: If kept I suggest rename to Template:History of Kurdistan. Khorshid 00:10, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This actually makes sense, especially now with Iraqi Kurdistan become more autonomous.Khosrow II 00:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rename

message: The section removed by Dbachmann can be considered at least as history of the Kurdish homeland. I think it's better to keep it, but we can solve the problem with renaming the template. HeviyaJiyan (talk) 08:52, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Pre-Islamic Kurdistan

message: I added Kurdish language to the Culture section of the template, because I think it's obviously a very essential cultural element. 
Should it not be a good idea to add Kurdish cuisine and Kurdish clothing too?
And wouldn't it be nice if someone added a proper image to the template?
Yun-x (talk) 03:05, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Kurdish Culture

message: The term Medo-Carduchian is not "made-up here" as one user stated. The classical Armenian sources knew them as "Mards" (But actually Armenians interchangeably used both names of "Mards" and "Kurds" for the Kurdish people, up to 19th century). Medo-Carduchian or Mahkert, or as in Kurdish (Kurd+Manj), reflects the fact that Kurdistan since pre-historic times was home to two intermingled linguistic groups: the Hurro-Urartians (including Hurrians, Urartians, Mannaeans,Shubria, Carduchians etc) and the often dominant aristocrats of Mitanni, Matiene, Medes, Mards,(Mardpetakan, Amatuni, etc). Roboskiye (talk) 16:56, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Medo-Carduchian

message: Raised this at WP:NPOVN#Original research at Template:Kurds. I can only find one reliable source for such dynasties, and if there were such a group of dynasties I'd expect more sources. But the addition of Medes and House of Kayus seems to be original research and isn't in the source used at Moxoene, which doesn't mention either. . 17:11, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original research in the Karduchian dynasties section 

message: The religion category in this infobox mentions a deist minority among the Kurds.  Can anybody provide a source for this?  I haven't been able to find any references, and it seems on the face of it implausible that deism, a philosophical position associated with a particular time and place in the western tradition, would have a more than negligible following among a people with a completely different philosophical tradition.  It seems most plausible to me that a previous editor has mis-characterized 'secularism' as a political position with 'deism' as a philosophical position.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.165.8.63 (talk) 02:43, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deism??