Talk:Tardu

Untitled

Somebody has tagged this article as unreferenced. But this article is sourced. The sourced are written in the reference section. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 08:43, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Turkic alphabet

Tardu's name written in old Turkic alphabet has been editted.() But I am spectical about it. The first version of this alphabet is in Tonyukuk's monument which had been erected 120 years after Tardu's death. No body knows if that alphabet was in use in 600 s. So I unless a proof is given about the usage of the alphabet in 600, the edit must be considered as irerevelant and must be cleared. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 05:28, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Old Turkic letters cleared. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 12:48, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

According to this source . Takabeg (talk) 15:54, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I remembered that you insisted in putting Lev Gumilev's proposals in this article. You accept Gumilev but you don't accept Tonyukuk. Your approach is inconsistent :) Takabeg (talk) 16:01, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I didn't understand the relation between the Turkic script and the modern writer Lev Gumilev. (Besides the discussion concerning Gumilev was in another article Turkic interregnum) The question is "Did the Turks use Turkish script in the early 7 th century or not" If the script had already been in use, OK, then lets write Tardu's name in this script. Otherwise, the script must be cleared. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 10:10, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Those are not Turkish script but Old Turkic script　(File). And they didn't use this script in the early 7th century. This script system was begun to be used in 8th century. There is no reason to remove them. Takabeg (talk) 11:39, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Well Turks also used Uighur and Arabic scripts in later years. But this does not necessitate to write the names in these scripts. Normally the names are written in modern form and in original form only. Since Turks didn't have an alphabeth of their own in the late 6th century, the name should be written only in modern form. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 09:23, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Please this is not how historical research is done. The first Göturk Khaganate in the time of Tardu had made one incsription only, not in old turkic alphabet,but a aramic derived script in sogdian,so he never written his name like that. This is retro-active applied and given a etomology. So no, its like saying the 15th Pharaos name was written in English "Johnny", but it wasent. This is giving a very false impression.

Also im highly suspicious of these turkish names translated from chinese, really i dont think these names are correct, and looking upp the etomolgy it seems like it was added to turkish by psuedo-scientific way in this century. Best example is "Kül Shad Bagha Ishbara Qaghan" And using old Turkish name Seto or Shetu to mean white dragon??, for anyone worth his salt he can easily see these names are fanciful conjectures by not so honest people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bennanak88 (talk • contribs) 14:22, 5 November 2019 (UTC)