Talk:Yusuf Adil Shah

message: The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Jreferee 19:27, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Class_parameter|Biography assessment rating]] comment 

message: I have added some observations and references made by the scholar T.N. Devare that greatly enhances our understanding of Yusuf 'Adil Shah, and provides clear proof that contradicts the fictitious, albeit very popular account of Yusuf's Ottoman origins.--Jemiljan 21:14, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Details

message: Currently, there are 3 sources concerning his ethnicity:
Two stating Yusuf was a Georgian slave,
*Chaurasia, Radhey Shyam (2002). History of Medieval India: From 1000 A.D. to 1707 A.D. p. 101, "Yusuf Adil Khan was a Georgian slave purchased by Mahmud Gawan."
*Subrahmanyam, Sanjay (2012). Courtly Encounters: Translating Courtliness and Violence in Early Modern Eurasia. p. 101, "It was he who had created the Deccan sultanates, by handing over "his principal provinces to his servants and slaves" such as a certain Yusuf 'Adil Khan, "carver at his table, a Georgian by race."
One stating Yusuf was son of the Ottoman Sultan Murad:
*Salma Ahmed Farooqui, A Comprehensive History of Medieval India: From Twelfth to the Mid-Eighteenth Century, (Dorling Kindersley, 2011), 174, "Yusuf Adil Khan of Turkish descent was the son of king Agha Murad of Turkey."
There is no reason to restore "Bahmani" nobleman, since it is unsourced. There is also no reason to place Turkish in the lead for his ethnicity, since that would be undue weight, per the sources. --Kansas Bear (talk) 15:28, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The reference to TN Devare that I posted (subsequently removed for no particular reason given), not only discusses the primary, rather than secondary historical sources, but also provides that supposedly "missing" Bahmani source. According to Devare, this Ottoman legend is only related by Firishta, and no other source, hence a fabrication.Jemiljan (talk) 13:40, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources and undue weight 

message: Kücük Ahmed was born 1450 and was killed 1451.
It is said, that this Boy was saved by his Mother Tajunisa Halima.
And this boy was later named Yusuf adil shah, when he grew up in Iran.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.46.105.20 (talk) 14:58, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: So? We have multiple sources stating other origins which are equally represented within the article. Your edit(s) emphasizes one origin with an entire paragraph(unsourced) devoted to one origin, which is undue weight.  --Kansas Bear (talk) 16:35, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kücük Ahmed  alias Yusuf Adil Shah  

message: This source is outdated c.1878, which is continued to be used by DurChalen to push his POV and edit warring. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:38, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdated source  

message: As recently changed by Simongraham:
*"Yusuf Adil Shah was a son of the Ottoman Sultan Murad II.[2]. On the death of his father, he was to be executed by his brother, the future Mehmed the Conqueror, but escaped to Ardabil, from which he traveled to Sawa, Kashan, Isfahan and Shiraz, finally arriving in India in disguise about 1459.[3]. He was sold as a Georgian slave to the Prime Minster of the Bahmani Sultanate, Mahmud Gawan."
*2. Farooqui, Salma Ahmed (2011). A Comprehensive History of Medieval India: From Twelfth to the Mid-Eighteenth Century. Dorling Kindersley. p. 174.
This is correct and properly represents what the book says.
*3. Bolar, Varija R (2012). "Turks in Karnataka" (PDF). International Journal of Social Studies 4 (1): 423-424.
This is misrepresented and cherry-picked information. Since Bolar states, "The founder of the Adil Shahi dynasty was Yusuf Beg,a Turkman according to Munajjim Bashi,  an  Ottoman  historian. He  belonged to the Aq-Quyunlu  or  the  “White Sheep” tribe of Diyarbykir in eastern Anatolia(Asia Minor). (Nayeem, 2008:22)". In comparison to the information that is actually used in a deceptive way to indicate historical fact, Bolar states, "Yusuf Adil Turk, was popularly believed to be a prince of the Ottoman dynasty of Rum.". "Popularly believed" meaning not historical fact. Which oddly is the exact opposite of how Simongraham has presented this information. --Kansas Bear (talk) 15:59, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins