Talk:Haji Bektash Veli

message: Hajji Bektash Wali is not Persian (Farsi),he is an Iranian Turkmen!
did you ever heard an ethnic iranian name like bektash? bek means strong, tash means rock (like in tashkent) in turkic languages. so his name means strong rock in turkish. its not important whether he was persian, or turk, or japanese or something else. though i red the comments and saw some persian ultra-nationalists trying to define azerbaijani and turkish peoples' ancestry. i want to ask them what would you gain even if all the things you wrote are true? what if azerbaijani people actually grandsons of persians and people of turkey are greeks' whom accidentally started to speak language of a few nomadic turkmens wandering around? what would change those things on the face of old mother earth? do you really think those "facts" would change the way those peoples see themselves? do you expect them to embrace their ancestor's culture and suddenly switch to their language?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.180.85.232 (talk) 22:41, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments 

message: * '"Hacı Bektaş Veli" -wikipedia'   158,000 total hits  547 English page hits
* '"Hajji Bektash Wali" -wikipedia'   509 total hits 154 English page hits denizTC 17:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is English wikipedia and Hacı Bektaş doesn't contain English characters. You can redirect Hacı Bektaş to this Page. The name which is used for people's name in English is written with English characters. If the name comes Hacı Bektaş here, the name of Japanese People should come in Japanese  in the article name. Goolgle hits isn't important here.--Soroush83 19:56, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Turkish google hits don not matter here, this is the English Wikipedia, Hajji Bektash Wali is the proper and common name in English used by Britannica  and all the other major Encyclopedias, and various academic books and journals. --Mardavich 22:16, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  google hits 

message: I moved page back to its original English names. Here is the English Wikipedia. Please do not use Turkish scripts and names in the title page.--behmod talk 22:53, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We do, because his common name in English is Hajji Bektash Wali. Look him up in any other English encyclopedia out there. --Mardavich 23:53, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Apples and oranges, Rumi is not his full name. Full names are more appropriate for biography  titles. --Mardavich 02:12, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Here is English Wikipedia! 

message: Guys, I undid some vandalism by an anon that seemed to have gone under the radar (removal of sourced information). I reinserted the sourced information. Keep an eye out for more vandalism, thanks.Azerbaijani 17:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. The source was misused. I removed some OR. DenizTC 07:24, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vanadalism

message: I can't help feeling a little disappointed the page doesnot deal more with Hajji Bektash Wali, rather than wandering to a discussion of the Bektashi. i.e. Hajji Bektash Wali was long dead before the suppression of the order. Yes, have a section on the Bektashi, but the discssion should be on that main article, while this page could be beefed up with more solid infoabout the man himself, surely?Harrypotter 20:44, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Bektashi]] or Hajji Bektash Wali

message: Why is there so much emphasis on his Iranian roots and little on his legacy?
His influence and legacy is everywhere to be felt and found in Ottoman and even modern day Turkish culture and history. His greatest influence were in Anatolia and Balkans through Ottomans. Bektaşizm was the code of the Jannisaries. What's up with the nationalism and racism? So much so, alien concepts to philosophers like Bektaşi and Mevlana who thought of all humans as one.--Doktor Gonzo 12:10, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too much emphasis on his ethnic roots and too little on his legacy 

message: Haci Bektas Veli was not a Tat ( the old Turks called iranian people "tat". Tat means in old turkic dark or ugly)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.34.14.34 (talk) 13:14, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hajji Bektash Wali is ethnically,culturally,racially and genetically Persian not Turk 

message: I have reverted the unexplained deletion of sources by an anon IP. Tajik (talk) 23:02, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  RV 

message: Hajji Bektash Wali wrote his Makalat in Turkish.Also Azeris and Turks are Turkic and "O" isn't the Turkic haplotype.Kyrgyzes and Uyghurs have high r1a and r1b frequencies like Turkey.Aren't they Turkic?Also I've had a DNA test from iGENEA and I hav haplogroup N from Y-DNA(like Yakuts) Also who said Turkish ppl don't have Central Asian culture?We speak TURKISH,not persian or greek!And our music,food,drinks are dominantly central asian.Like "saz" instrument,"ayran" drink etc.
We TURKS are TURKIC and we proud of it!!!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.165.100.11 (talk) 12:14, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: 1) This article is about Hajji Baktash, not about Rumi (whose origins and biography are undisputed in scholarly literature, no matter what his alleged descendants today claim). 2) All of you need to read WP:SOURCES (www.mevlana.net is not a reliable source according to Wikipedia standards; besides that, it contains obvious mistakes, such as the claim that Balkh was inhabited by Turkish tribes 800 years ago, which is against all historical sources available). 3) Hajji Baktash neither wrote in Persian nor in Turkish, but exclusively in Arabic. Later Turkish poems attributed to him are fabrications. His ethnic origins are totally unknown, but the oldest (and most reliable sources) suggest an Iranian background. That includes his heterodox beliefs, the fact that he was born in Khorasan, that he did not have any tribal affiliations, etc. Tajik (talk) 01:02, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  About Ethnicity 

message: He appears to have been born in Iran/Persia but besides the murkiness of his actual history, we have a reliable source that says he was born to a Turkish family. Our policy WP:VERIFY makes it clear that verifiability is what we are looking for, and whether we think there were Turks in this area centuries ago or not is irrelevant. I certainly have no idea and frankly don't care what he was, only that we follow Wikipedia guidelines and policies and don't get bogged down in nationalism. Dougweller (talk) 17:17, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: All the reliable, contemporary sources refer to him as Persian (he did, after all, speak in Persian, write in Persian, and was born in Persia!). Some Turkish nationalists have retrospectively claimed he had some Turkic connections, but this has never been proven (you keep conflating "Turkish" with Turkic, by the way). If you don't care, why are you edit-warring to insert information that contradicts the well sourced info that is already in the article? Dohezarsersdah (talk) 19:48, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: We have a reliable source saying he was born into a Turkish family, please don't remove it again. Go to WP:RSN if you don't think it's a reliable source, but now that you have been blocked once it would be imprudent to replace it without consensus. If RSN says it's not a reliable source, I certainly wouldn't want to use it. I'd suggest we drop 'Persian' but I'm not going to get into an edit war over that. Dougweller (talk) 05:12, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: We have a reliable source saying he was Persian, please don't remove it again. Go to WP:RSN if you don't think it's a reliable source, but if you don't want to be blocked, it would be wise not to replace it without consensus. If RSN says it's not a reliable source, I certainly wouldn't want to use it. I'd suggest we drop 'Turkish family' but I'm not going to get into an edit war over that. Dohezarsersdah (talk) 12:30, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Very funny. I never said we didn't have reliable sources saying he was Persian, I just think it's best to avoid nationalistic wars over this. However, I do object to your changing the bit about him being born into a Turkish family into 'his family was Turkic' because that is simply not what the source says, it says "Turkish family". You can change it or I will. Dougweller (talk) 13:19, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's an anachronism. "Turkish" today means, of the Republic of Turkey. The Republic of Turkey did not exist then. Aside from the fact that the source is obviously wrong, since there were no "prominent" Turkmen in the areas around Nishapur in the 13th century. The Turkmen were, by definition, nomads, while Haji Bektash was apparently learned. Where does the author get her information? I think she's just repeating what must be an modern Turkish tradition. How many sources contradicting your one will I need to find before you give up on the dream of him being a Turk? Dohezarsersdah (talk) 13:41, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: All I know is what the source says, and it does not say Turkic and thus we cannot say Turkic, we have to report it accurately. I repeat, I don't care what nationality he is, although it appears that you do. The important thing is that our articles use reliable sources and report them accurately, and where they disagree, show the disagreement. And as I've said, if you have a source that says anything more about his family and meets our criteria, by all means add it as well in an NPOV fashion. Dougweller (talk) 13:58, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Congratulations, you've made Wikipedia look idiotic. Can you appreciate the difference in quality between your source ("Phyllis Jestice" of the University of Southern Mississippi, lol) and Martin van Bruinessen publishing in a peer-reviewed journal? No? What fantastic admin we have here at Wikipedia... Dohezarsersdah (talk) 14:03, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Congratulations, your searching ability appears stunted. I have listed two scholarly journals stating Bektash was Turkish, including Voltaire. Instead of wasting time with childish remarks like, "...you've made Wikipedia look idiotic.", you should have refined your search parameters. Cheers. --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:01, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't surprise to see that Haji Bektash is accounted as a Persian according to three articles of thousands. It is very funny and I am not going to do anything except laughing on you, persian nationalist. If you don't know anything about his ethnicity, take his Turkish name "Bektas", take his brother name "Mentes". Sorry but nobody become a persian just because he is borned in Iran. As you know, maybe forget already, Turks ruled Iran for a thousand years, probably you count all of them persian. Anyway, you are very funny, nothingelse. Ongan (talk) 15:26, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethnicity redux 

message: The informations on the main site have to be corrected:
* Hac-e Bektas Veli is a ethnic Turk, on the father side
* his title "hace" means, people do hacc to him! not he is doing hacc to mecca
* he is a Seyyid, a ancestor of the prophet Muhammed on the mother side, he is from the descent of prophet Ismael
178.115.250.8 (talk) 06:10, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seyyid Pir-e Horosan Hac-e Bektas-i Veli 

message: It is important, because the Turks, Persians and Kurds in argument about his origin. It is saying that Musa-i Kazim was his grand-grandfather, but he can´t be the decenders of  Imam Musa-i Kazim. It is´nt anyway possible. Please prove this fact. If he was really from Chorassan - what i also think, because he preaches the Persian-Zoroastrian philosophie about drinking wine and dancing the Semah (like rumi had preaches) - then he was a Persian. And there is some other facts that confirm me and my minds about Haci Bektas Veli Persian origin. Omar khayyam,Abu l-Wafa, Fariduddin Attar, Firdausi, Hafes (Shiraz-i) are the childeren of the Islamic Golden Age. Most of them was´nt really muslims. They alle were Alevis, even Avicenna - though he was a sunni. It doenst matter which confession these people was belong, it is there attitude and how they was thinking about the Islam.
:Wikipedia is not in the business of proof, we simply report what reliable sources say about a subject, and when there is disagreement we try to present all sides of an argument in proportion to their significance. Dougweller (talk) 15:13, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  The claim that he was a descendant of Musa al-Kadhim is not reliable at all. In fact, it is refuted by most experts. He was most likely a Persian from Khorasan, though this is not known for sure. His works were composed in Arabic and later translated into Turkish. The name "Baktash" was not his real name but given to him by his Turkoman followers. --Lysozym (talk) 17:06, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It is sources, not claims, that we evaluate, but in any case I don't see Musa al-Kadhim in the article, what have I missed? Dougweller (talk) 18:17, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prove the ethnicity 

message: I read the discussion about the ethnicity of him and couldn't stop to laugh either as I read that he is Persian! Than I looked up for the references which 'proves' that he is Persian. Here the full text of the 'The Harvard Theological Review, Cambridge University Press, Vol. 2, No. 3, Jul., 1909, (p. 343)': ...THE ALEVIS, OR DEIFIERS OF ALI 343
ing and for the moral training of their followers. All gatherings
are very secret, no inquirers being admitted except by the most
reliable introductions.
In Arabia and Egypt this faith has scarcely made any progress.
But in Persia and Mesopotamia there are from two to three million
Alevis. There are about fifty thousand in the province of
Aleppo, but none south of the city of Aleppo. In the Adana,
Diarbekir, Smyrna, Salonica, and Caesarea provinces there are
tens of thousands. Haji Bektash, where descendants of Ali live,
eighteen hours from Caesarea, is an important point. Constantinople
is not a centre, but in Macedonia a large portion of the population
have become disciples. In the city of Aintab there are
about five hundred Alevi homes and two thousand individual believers.
In Antioch there are scarcely any, except for the Nuseiri
villages.The villages of Marash and the town and region of Albustan
should be specially mentioned. In the Suruj plain the
people are Sunnis. Most of the Aintab villages are Sunni, as
Burj and Kuzul Hissar. Kuchdam is chiefly Yezid. But beyond
Sazghun to the south are many Alevi villages centring around
Kharar. The population of the Kilis country is chiefly Arab
and unfriendly to outsiders. But the tent-dwellers are Alevi.
In Birejik about one hundred and fifty of the Turkish people
belong to this faith. In the city and villages of Urfa there are few;
in Aleppo few; in Antioch perhaps two hundred houses. The
most thoroughly converted district is that of Dersim, in the Erzingan
vilayet. The length of this district is fifteen days' horseback
ride.
Essential Teaching concerning Prophecy. In the world there
is one Truth. This Truth possesses great power. There is no
power existing greater than this. The Power is in itself, not dependent
upon any person. All other existing things get their
light and might from this one truth. This Power "doeth what
it wisheth and judgeth what it willeth."
Nothing can attack and overturn this Power. In the process
of time the Power brought to light the charges and commandments
that were necessary for that period. For instance, in the
time of Moses what was necessary for the people was said by Ali
by means of Moses...
Does that prove that he is Persian? There is no information about him at all! This page tells about Hacıbektaş lol The fourth reference is just a personal website by someone, can't be counted as a reference at all, so I delete it. I couldn't find the full text of the first three references but I believe they are also some fake references of a Persian nationalist.. I suggest to leave the claim that he was Persian in the article page but to put his real Turkish ethnicity in the beginning sentence.Sbasturk (talk) 03:26, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Haji_Bektash_Veli&diff=next&oldid=457539153 A sock puppet is the owner of fake ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dohezarsersdah Sbasturk (talk) 03:49, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

text: Also http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Haji_Bektash_Veli&diff=next&oldid=457608668. All the references that he is Persian are fake by a sock puppet user. I'm converting the article to the original form. Sbasturk (talk) 03:51, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It would appear that someone added Persian under the guise of "real" references. If you look on the talk page back to Oct. 2011, I added some references that stated he was Turkish. Unfortunately, when someone removes references, it is a common reaction to simply revert the removal and not check to see the verifiability of the references. --Kansas Bear (talk) 04:03, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes I noticed them and looked up for them, too. Your citations are still in the article page. I suggest to notice admins to protect this page against nationalist and vandal users. Thank you for your contribution. Sbasturk (talk) 04:12, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Please please when you discuss something on a talk page mention this in an edit summary! Calling them 'fake' isn't enough, pov editors do that too. I'm still not sure we can assert as fact that he is Turkish, but I've already wasted time on this. Dougweller (talk) 09:52, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

text: Yes, you're right as well. But please don't expect that people will turn thumbs up with fake references on his 'Persian ethnicity'. I think the actual state of the article is much more better than the old one with fake references of blocked users. Besides, there is no scientific evidence on this page on his Persian decent either; but only some nationalist attacks by Lysozym (old username: Tajik) and other attacks by several sock puppets. I will be keeping the actual status till someone reliable will remake a complete new paragraph on the thoughts/evidences about his ethnicity with NPOV Sbasturk (talk) 12:52, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

text: I do not understand, why his ethnicity - which is not really known - has to be mentioned in the lead?! Secondly, none of the sources presented by Sbasturk actually proves that he was a Turk. It is a collection of tertiary sources, none of them are very reliable when it comes to his origins. The only real academic source given in the article is the Encyclopaedia Iranica, which makes clear that all that is known about him is that he hailed from Khorasan and hence may have been an Iranian. But it is just an assumption. I am going to ignore the personal attacks by User:Sbasturk. And, as his real already suggests, we should not expets much transperancyx and neutrality from him. All he does is googling the words "Haji Baktash" and "Turk" and than thinks that he can change context. But Wikipedia is about the quality of sources, not about quantity. This goes to both sides. --Lysozym (talk) 00:10, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

text: As long as I understand, Haci Bektas Veli,as he is called in Turkish,was born in Nishapur in northern Iran into a prominent Turkish family is the only source uses "Turkish" as ethnicity, among existing source (in this article). I think he had to use the term "Turkic family", although it's another problem. The author of that section is Ibrahim Kalin. Do you know whether Ibrahim Kalin is the same person as İbrahim Kalın, who is the Deputy Undersecretary of the Prime Ministry of the Republic of Turkey ? Takabeg (talk) 00:33, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  According to Lysozym: "[...] the Baktashi order, founded by a Khurasani, Hajji Baktash, who after fleeing from the Tatars found numerous disciples among the Persians and Anatolian Turks [...]" Another fake ref to be deleted. Sbasturk (talk) 10:22, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

text: I can't understand either, how Encyclopaedia Iranicais given as the main reference (as written fully) in the text.. Will be deleted, too. Sbasturk (talk) 10:22, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

text:  Sayyed Hossein Nasr uses the word "Khurasani" which is by far the most correct of all. It does not explicitely state that he was an Iranian, but "Khurasani" is very much a common designation of East Iranian Persians. I have added the quote to the article. The only two authoritative sources used - the respective EI2 and EIr - either do not mention his ethnic origins (as in the EI2 which simply claims that he was from Khurasan), or support the Iranian theory (Hamid Algar - who is without any doubt an expert on the subject as has evaluated primary sources - uses the expression "highly probable ... that his origins were Iranian"). All the rest are googled quotes from certain books, none of them can be considered "secondary". They are "tertiary sources" at best. I have removed nazr-e-kaaba.com. It is not a "source" at all. As for "Persian" and "Iranian": in this context, they are used as synonyms, especially as a contrast to "Arab" and "Turk". Also worthy of note: Hajji Bektash wrote all of his works in Arabic, not Persian and not Turkish. And the name "Baktash" is attributed to him in later biographies and legends; it is unknown what his real name was. --Lysozym (talk) 01:23, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Just like the fake references of Lysozym, her/his information is also limited and fake. He has written both in Arabic and Turkish. Probably his works written in Turkish overcount the ones in Arabic. Please read the page 372 as an introduction to that.
http://books.google.de/books?id=wivA2z2koOgC&pg=PA372&lpg=PA372&dq=Fevaid+bektash&source=bl&ots=C23vNVWAoq&sig=bddyWAuAl7g9Xe8zbFSbAF-WQH4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=fCj1UKWfGIKs4AS-2ICAAw&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=372&f=false I'll be removing some of her/his edits because of the lack of NPOV Sbasturk (talk) 10:07, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

text:  @ Sbasturk: it is very obvious, that you do not have the slightest competence in this subject. The Encyclopaedia Iranica, for example, writes: "A record of his own teachings and beliefs is contained in the Maqālāt (also known as Küçük Vilâyet-Nâme), the only book reliably attributed to him. It seems to have been written originally in Arabic [...] Two Persian treatises have been attributed to Ḥājī Bek­tāš: Fawāʾed and Maqālāt-e ḡaybīya wa kalemāt-e ʿaynīya (copies of both in ms. Osman Ergin, İstanbul Belediye Kütüphanesi, 1948). Both consist of unacknowledged borrowings from the writings of Sufis who lived either before or after Ḥājī Bek­tāš and must therefore be regarded as inauthentic. Also incorrect is the attribution to Ḥājī Bek­tāš of a brief šaṭḥīya in Turkish, written by a certain Anwarī, a name wrongly taken to be the maḵlaṣ of Ḥājī Bek­tāš." The Encyclopaedia of Islam writes: "[...] the Makalat of Hadjdji Bektash, originally written in Arabic and translated into Turkish verse by Khatiboghlu [...] The attitude of Bektashis towards Islam is marked both by the general features of popular mysticism, and by their far-reaching disregard for Muslim ritual and worship, including the salat. In their secret doctrines, they are Shi'is, acknowleding the twelve imams and, in particular, holding Dja'far al-Sadiq in high esteem." As for the book you have posted above (M. Soileau: Humanist mystics : nationalism and the commemoration of saints in Turkey, Santa Barbara, 2006), it clearly says on p. 373: "None of these works can conclusively be attributed to Haji Bektash, and thus none can be taken as proof for his Turkishness". This sentence is followed by some allegations by the author, while he concludes with "Neither the Vilayet-name nor the works attributed to him mention his ethnicity, other than references in the Vilayet-name of his having originated in Khorasan [...]"; the claim that he was a disciple of Ahmad Yasavi is very obviously wrong since they did not even live in the same century. Stop cherry picking sources and sentences. It is strange anyway that you are trying to prove your point by cherry-picking from a book that is discussing and examining the revisionist policy of the Turkish Repiblic and the various claims of "Turkishness" in this context. --Lysozym (talk) 10:39, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fake reference on his ethnicity 

message: Please note this classic treatment of the subject in English, which has been in print since 1937 and is noted several times on Google books, as here; http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=PAgcMwEACAAJ&dq=%22the+bektashi+order+of+dervishes%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=BkQgUZCdDsfvsgbLiYCwCQ&ved=0CEAQ6AEwAw
I removed the NN tag since the text seems now to reflect the sources fairly and there is no extant dispute on this page.
Thanks, Redheylin (talk) 02:48, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Classic Study in English 

message: In the opening he is referred to as "Alevi," however the article includes the Sunni series. Also, in the Turkish article it includes the Sunni series as well, but in more detail. Are there any good sources that clarify his religious identity? Xtremedood (talk) 11:29, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Religious Identity?

message: Would ZinedineZidane98 care to explain why he is linking Turkic languages for the ethnicity of Haji Bektash Veli? According to ZinedineZidane, " just making clear the distinction between Turkic (everywhere from NW China to Anatolia) and Turkish (people of the modern Republic..", which is unsupported by the sources.
Sources:
*Richard Robert Madden, The Turkish Empire:In its relations with Christianity and civilization, Vol.1, 335; "...he sent them to Haji Bektash, a Turkish saint."
*Indries Shah, The Way of the Sufi, 294; "..Bektash of the Turks..."
*Mark Soileau, Humanist Mystics:Nationalism and the commemoration of saints in Turkey, 375; "Haji Bektash was a Turk.".
*University of Georgia, Islam and Islamic Studies Resources, Islamic Studies, Islam, Arabic, and Religion page of Dr. Godlas., "..Haji Bektash Veli is one of the most significant Anatolian (Turkish) Sufi saints.."
*Futuwwa Traditions in the Ottoman Empire Akhis, Bektashi Dervishes, and Craftsmen,G. G. Arnakis, Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Vol. 12, No. 4, Oct., 1953. --"...we see at once a man that made a lasting impression on his fellow Turks."
*Bryan S. Turner, Islam: Islam and social movements, p.281, "In the lives of Turkish saints such as Ahmed Yasavi or Haji Bektash we find many tales about miracles which .... --Kansas Bear (talk) 01:40, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  ZinedineZidane98 care to explain? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Haji Bektash Veli. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140408214035/http://teqeamerica.com/articles/article1/ to http://teqeamerica.com/articles/article1/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140408214035/http://teqeamerica.com/articles/article1/ to http://teqeamerica.com/articles/article1/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:05, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: On the other hand, Ibn Khallikan reports that Shī'ite tendencies belonged not to him but rather to his murids, who took refuge in his tekke at Suluca Kara Oyuk in Kırşehir after the Babai Revolt.Ibn Khallikan, Shakāyik.108.31.250.33 (talk) 17:10, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  deleted important source placed 

message: Hi,
There is a discussion going on in the article Fushenjan, the "claimed birthplace" of Bektash.  Please check the recent edits of that article. That article has become related to this article. I am not an expert on this matter so I would suggest that the common editors of this article check it out.
Best of regards to you all, Ehsanbasafa (talk) 17:16, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Fushenjan]] 

message: Is it necessary to have 6 and 8 citations on his turkish and persian ancestry? Danial Bass (talk) 01:24, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No. It really isn't, and the general quality of many of those citations was extremely poor - either page numbers and no dates or editions, or dates but no page numbers. A Number of the Turk quotes could variously have referred to someone who is ethnically or culturally/linguistically a Turk, making them fairly useless. I've left two references for each - one quote, and one extended tertiary entry apiece. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:37, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, seeing that no one will probably be in conflict if the worst citations were deleted, then I can do it if I have time. Or you if you'd like, since it sounds like you've already went through each (or most) of it. Danial Bass (talk) 22:36, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I already sorted through them as I went and placed the excess sources in further reading. Iskandar323 (talk) 05:44, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethnic citation overlinks 

message: I can only think of Turkish nomads,Kurds and Armenians,Turkic people were and (some people say) are not Turkish due to no mixing happening but because of Turkish Language Association ditching Arabic and Persian due to racism or something. Just my guess. I would edit it to Anatolian nomads. Vofa (talk) 12:45, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Note that language doesn’t mean ethnicity, or haplogroups. I hold the same view(that Turkish people aren’t Turkic) but will not edit it unless someone comes,to get an assessment. Argue in good faith. Vofa (talk) 12:47, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  ,,He had influence on Turkic nomads in Asia Minor,, 

message: The book citation doesn’t correspond with any info,to my conclusion it’s a fake link,the book is not accessible,book is about Byzantium. Still not sure whether to edit or not,I’ll go for it if nobody replies. Vofa (talk) 12:50, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  [4] Alexēs G. K. Savvidēs, Byzantium in the Near East: Its Relations with the Seljuk Sultanate of Rum in Asia Minor, The Armenians of Cilicia and The Mongols, A.D. c. 1192-1237, Kentron Vyzantinōn Ereunōn, 1981, p. 116.