Talk:Kara-Khanid Khanate

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search



  1. Searched the web for 普速完
  2. Searched the web for 屈出律
  3. Searched the web for 直魯古
  4. Searched the web for 耶律
  5. Searched the web for 出律
  6. Searched the web for 夷列
  7. Searched the web for 塔不煙.
  8. Searched the web for 塔不烟
  9. Searched the web for 西遼
  10. Searched the web for 元史译文
  11. 元史Yanyi (best)
  12. 安史之乱后的西域历史
  13. 2.喀什噶尔和河中地区的突厥化:哈拉汗朝
  14. 喀什噶尔的古代居民
  15. 阿諾德·湯因比 人類与大地母親
  16. Searched the web for balasaghun.
  17. Searched the web for balasagun
  18. Literature in Central Asia
  19. "Turkish History, Leavening of Cultures, Civilization" H. B. Paksoy, D. Phil.



Paksoy, H.B., ALPAMYSH. Central Asian Identity under Russian Rule.

name of article[edit]

"Karakhanid" is not in common use. All standard transcriptions of the Arabic alphabet use a "Q" for the ق , and virtually all scholarly work on the Qarakhanids in English uses the name "Qarakhanid." — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:41, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Song dyansty section[edit]

Someone should improve this section possibly by translating the Chinese into English. As is, I don't think it should be kept. Xaphoo 19:17, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


This article does not cite any reliable references. To a large part, it contradicts standard reference works such as the Encyclopaedia of Islam or the book The History of the Turkic Peoples by Peter Golden. For example, it does not explain that the name "Qarakhanid" was not their native name, but the name that modern scholars have chosen for the dynasty. Tajik (talk) 23:05, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

We cannot find any serious despute in this edition. Takabeg (talk) 01:01, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Persianized Kypchack ??[edit]

Something is wrong with the organisation of the article. In Early History subsection Persianization and Kypchak dialects are discussed.

The Karluk (or Chagatay) group of Turkish languages may be affected by Persian which is a common cultural exchange. But even if that is so, that topic has no place in Early history subsection. ( In Culture section claims are already repeated.)

But surely, the assertion which states the Persian influence on Kypchak group of languages (which were then spoken by Turks in Europe) is highly suspicious.( Codex Cumanicus was published in the 13 th century about the language of Turks in Europe thousands kilometers far from Persia) Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 13:51, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Alternative names in other languages[edit]

It's unnecessary for us to put modern Kazakh name Қарахан мемлекеті and modern Turkish name Karahanlılar in this article. Because we can easily find them, that are the titles of Kazakh Wikipedia (kk:Қарахан мемлекеті) and Turkish Wikipedia (tr:Karahanlılar). Moreover they are only modern usage and not important to read histrical documents. But the title of this article in Chinese Wikipedia is zh:喀喇汗国. 黑汗, 桃花石 is useful for reading historical domuments. The title of this article in Persian Wikipedia is fa:خانان کاراخانی and different from قراخانيان, Qarākhānīyān or خاقانيه‎, Khakānīya (I've transferred from Turkish Wikipedia). In short, modern alternatives are unuseful and histrical alternatives are useful for readers of English Wikipedia. If you doubt them, you can use {{Citation needed|date=}}. Takabeg (talk) 20:24, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Qara-Khanid Khanate ?[edit]

"Qara-Khanid Khanate" 1 result

Takabeg (talk) 17:07, 6 July 2011 (UTC)


I have been doing some rewriting on the article. The original article appeared unbalanced, lacking information on significant parts of the Karakhanid history, instead for some strange reasons concentrate a big part on the Kara-Khitans. It also contained unsourced information which directly contradicted what stated in books, and statements that seemed to be written from a biased perspective. I will adjust the content where I can find the reference. Hzh (talk) 11:18, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

One of the most egregious example is the description of the Kara-khitans as being harsh on the Kara-khanids. All the books I have consulted said that the they were tolerant rulers. The only one said to have pursued harsh policy was Kuchlug (though he may not be considered a Kara-khitan at all since he was a Naiman who usurped the throne), even then one book doubts the description of the events under his rule. Wiki articles should not give a skewed narrative that contradicts what is accepted history. Hzh (talk) 16:08, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Kara Khanid's wars with Khotanese Buddhists[edit]

Conversion of the Karakhanids to Islam[edit]

04:12, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Official language[edit]

The modern Uyghur language is descended from the Xakani Karluk language of the Kara-Khanid Khanate, not the old Uyghur language of the Uyghur Khaganate). It is the Western Yugur language which is descended from the old Uyghur language.

The Modern Uyghur's ancestral language was also known as Xakani, it was the official language of the Kara Khanids and was documented by Mahmud Kashgari.

Rajmaan (talk) 03:21, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Native name[edit]

The Karakhanids are Turkic, not Persian or Arabic, please don't add give those as their native names. While it may be argued that they are Persianized, they are certainly not Arabic, and you cannot use that as their native name. I will leave the Persian name for the time being for discussion, but Arabic simply cannot stay. I will remove the Persian name if there is no good reason is given, since being Persianized is not the same as Persian, therefore any suggestion that they are Persian is wrong. Hzh (talk) 13:45, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

These are the contemporary name used by historians, tell me where can you find Qarluq Turkic language? Your hypocrisy is outstanding since you kept the Persian name and changed the Persian one I have given. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 14:10, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Please don't dumb garbage material on my talk page and accuse me of things I have never said , I never claimed they were Arabic, never claimed "Persianized is not the same as Persian", never claimed they weren't Turkic people or suggested they were Persian, it seems you got a dog in this fight. I will let you win, congratulation. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 14:13, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
The field is meant for the native language, if you put that Arabic in, you are suggesting that they are Arabic. If you mean you cannot find their original title in their Turkic language, than you should not put anything in. We don't invent things. Chinese has contemporary name for them, but you certainly cannot put Chinese as their native name. Putting Arabic in as their native name simply suggest you have no inkling of the subject in question. I corrected the Persian name because that is commonly used in Persian, and that will be removed if you cannot give a good explanation why Persian should be added. Hzh (talk) 14:21, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Now you accusing me of not knowing the subject at hand when I have studied them extensively, okay I'm ignorant of the subject and you are the genius here. I will let you have your candy, okay so just be happy at the moment. You don't have to reply to me anymore.Alexis Ivanov (talk) 14:27, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Again stop adding garbage on my talk page when there is a talk page for this article. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 14:28, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────If telling you what the infobox is for is garbage, then you have a problem. You appear not to understand what the native name field is meant for - it is exactly what it says, name in the native language, per Template:Infobox former country. If you put Arabic name in there, you are claiming them to be Arabs, which suggests you have no idea what you are putting into the infobox. Hzh (talk) 14:32, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

That is right I know nothing, and you know everything, you are right I apologize, I should have known better what the infobox said, I'm stupid. Next time I will try my best to please you okay. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 14:37, 12 September 2016 (UTC)