User talk:Nobedarê Dunav

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Nobedarê Dunav. Thank you for your work on Principality of Ezdikhan. Another editor, Northernhenge, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for creating this page. It includes some links to disambiguation pages, including Jazira, Turks, Viceroy of the Caucasus, and Caucasian Army. Somebody familiar with the subject matter should please replace these with the appropriate links from the disambiguation pages.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Northernhenge}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Northernhenge (talk) 22:27, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Interest and time?

Hello dear @Nobedarê Dunav, I see that you are very involved with Yazidism on Wikipedia. I wanted to ask if you have the necessary language skills to also contribute to the Kurdish Wikipedia? Of course, this would all depend on your time and interest. The articles on Yazidism in the Kurdish Wikipedia are rather brief, even though there is a great need for more in-depth information. I would appreciate a positive response. Kurê Acemî (talk) 22:15, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello @Kurê Acemî,

Thank you for reaching out and for the encouragement.

I am actually a native speaker of Kurmancî and very fluent in it, particularly in reading and understanding advanced texts. However, the variety I speak natively is Behdînanî Kurmancî. While I can still adopt Standard Kurmancî to a good extent, I would have to be fully familiar with the specific writing guidelines and conventions used on the Kurdish Wikipedia first before writing. I have not taken the time yet to properly study and adapt to those as most of my focus so far has been on contributing to the English Wikipedia whenever I have time.

The reason is that many of the Yazidi-related articles on the English Wikipedia are still quite messy or incomplete. At the moment I am trying to prioritize improving and organizing those first. My plan is that once the English articles are in better shape, I can then use them as a basis to translate and expand the corresponding articles on the Kurdish Wikipedia as well.

That said, I definitely appreciate the suggestion and hope to contribute there in the future when I have the time to do it properly. Nobedarê Dunav (talk) 10:56, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Interest in helping with other Firmans?

Hi Nobedarê Dunav, it's been on my backburner for a while now, but I do want to get round to getting some of the Firman articles that have been previously deleted re-created. While I can do the work with English language sources (and other languages mainly European), you seem to have ability in Arabic and Kurdish, which could be of great help. If you are interested I can create the draft articles to start working on. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 13:29, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

As an additional note, the article on the 1832 Firman, currently suffers in the same ways that the other Firman articles did, relying on a single journal article for their coverage, with other sources not being focussed on the event. So, to prevent such, we need to find more sources that discuss the event in depth. I have begun adding more sources, but it will take time. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 13:36, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Hey Cdjp1, thanks for reaching out, I would be happy to help with that. Kurdish sources in particular should be useful for some of the less documented firmans, only issue with them is that it is often hard to find the ones that meet WP:RS criteria, but I still know some that might be worth assessing. Feel free to share the drafts whenever you are ready and I will take a look. Nobedarê Dunav (talk) 13:43, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

While we can use NONENG sources in articles, they tend not to be viewed as highly as ENG sources, which is nonsense but I can't force people to not think in such a manner. What we'd want is books that are published by publishers who have some providence/prominence, so publishers who have been around for a while, and don't have any obvious reputations for being poor quality would be where we can make an argument of reliability. Beyond that it would be is the author someone with relevant expertise, such as a known historian or university professor.

I have the 72nd from during the Armenian genocide at hand, so I can get that draft set up this evening. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 13:58, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Draft:Seventy-second firman of the Yazidi. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 16:22, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for setting up the draft. Before I start editing on it, I do have a couple concerns. Looking at the "Massacres" section, the article currently seems to cover a wide range of events across different geographies (from Mardin to Sinjar and even the Caucasus). In some Yazidi traditions and academic literature, these are often treated as separate, localized firmans rather than a single 72nd event. For example, I have this book (Qirkirina Qebîleya Basîyan) which considers the massacre of the Yazidi Basiyan tribe in Siirt during WWI as its own distinct firman. Bundling these localized events under one "72nd" title might be historically inaccurate and confusing for readers. If it were up to me, I would go with "Yazidi genocide during World War I" for clarity and recognizability. However, I know we have an ongoing disagreement regarding "genocide" in the 1832 title and I have not yet looked into whether sources lend this period the same genocidal framing as the 1832 one. That said, using "Firman" here is even more problematic because it’s not even a stable name across the various WWI-era massacres we are trying to cover. Could you clarify how you intend to reconcile these disparate local firmans under a single "72nd" heading, or would you be open to a more inclusive descriptive title that avoids the numbering conflict? Nobedarê Dunav (talk) 18:30, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

I am little familiar with this, so I would defer to you as to as to how to split it up. This was the state it was in as at the time of when it was last deleted from mainspace. I do think "Firman" is a perfectly good title, if we have sources which call it such, but if the sources do not, other names are fine in my opinion. The present title for the draft, like the text, is carried over from what it was at the time of deletion, the article did go through a few different titles during it's short existence.

On the note of genocide, to make it explicitly clear, I do recognise and support these events being recognised as cases of genocide, so it is not on such ground that I disagree with potential titles. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 08:27, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

I would also suggest copying your comment over to the Draft talkpage so we have the discussion easily available for people to join in the discussion. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 08:29, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

First of all, greetings

@Nobedarê Dunav Hello, I have been working on improving the Mir Muhammad Rebellion page using archival materials and primary sources.

I noticed that you have experience editing topics related to this region, so I wanted to ask for your general opinion on the current state of the page and how well it reflects the available sources. There is also one specific point I am unsure about: a figure of around 110,000 troops cited from archival material.

It seems quite high compared to other sources, and I am not entirely sure how well-supported or representative it is in context. Do you think this figure is reliable as presented, or should it be treated more cautiously? BEFOR01 (talk) 00:08, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi @BEFOR01, thanks for reaching out. I should be upfront that while I do edit in related areas, this particular topic isn't something I've worked on or know well, so I can only offer a very brief outside impression rather than any informed assessment of the article as a whole. On the article more broadly, I really am not in a position to give useful feedback. I haven't followed the topic and only glanced at this one point you flagged.

I took a quick look at the reference and cited page. The source itself is not archival material, but a secondary reference hosted on a website archiving Kurdish literature. It is a 2002 Sorani Kurdish-language book published by Aras Publications in Erbil, authored by Muḧemed Heme Baqî, dealing with the emirates of Ardalan, Baban and Soran through Qajar documents. On the 110,000 figure; looking at the source, my impression is that it could reasonably be presented but probably deserves some caution. The source appears to relay the figure from unspecified historians rather than establishing it independently, and no date is given for the troop movement. The infobox framing under "Prior to 1836" seems to be an editorial inference. Whether it warrants removal or just contextualization probably depends on what other sources say about Ottoman force size in this campaign. Given that it's also notably higher than the post-1836 figures, it might be worth either adding a qualifier in the infobox or discussing the figure more explicitly in the article body with appropriate context. If you have access to other secondary sources covering Ottoman operations in this period, cross-referencing would strengthen whatever the article ultimately says.

Hope that is still at least marginally helpful. Nobedarê Dunav (talk) 15:12, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for taking the time to check this, I really appreciate it.

Your point about the figure being relayed rather than firmly established makes sense. I agree that it should probably be treated more cautiously rather than presented too definitively.

I will either qualify it more clearly or move it into the article body with proper context, depending on how it fits with other sources.

Thanks again, this was very helpful. 🙏 BEFOR01 (talk) 19:32, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Nobedarê Dunav. Thank you for your work on Mir Ismail Chol Beg. Another editor, Scope creep, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Hi, I reviewed this. I took that last section out as its unsourced. There was a missing references. It can go back in when you get the references.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Scope creep}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

scope_creepTalk 14:56, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Soran-Dasini War

Hello, @Nobedarê Dunav

first of all I understand your motivation to defend Ottoman history, the page you put in deletion request was created when I was extended confirmed and another user had concluded this 1 KurdishPAL (talk) 09:22, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

I appreciate you reaching out. However my nomination is based entirely on policy, not any particular view of Ottoman history. Regarding EC status, the article was moved into article space on May 11, four hours before your EC was removed specifically for WP:GAMING. EC obtained through gaming does not constitute valid compliance with WP:CT/KURD. Apart from that, article itself has many issues, mainly independent notability concerns unrelated to your EC status, as explained by me here. Nobedarê Dunav (talk) 09:36, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

@Nobedarê Dunav

I understand your concerns about my statue when I created the page but this exception only happens when the page poses a real problem in other words the page is left without being deleted, apart from the fate of Governor Hussein beg otherwise the result or the course of this war is the same outcome in each source, the page itself evokes a period unknown to the Kurds KurdishPAL (talk) 09:45, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

There is no 'real problem' threshold in WP:CT/KURD enforcement, a violation is a violation. Source consistency also does not establish notability. Nobedarê Dunav (talk) 09:56, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

July 2026

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your recent edits to Qasim Shesho when you modified the page, you introduced unknown parameters. Just because you specify |some_param=some_variable does not always mean that variable will display. The |some_param= must be defined in the template. You can look at the documentation for the template you are using but it is also helpful to use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and ensure that the values you have added are displaying correctly. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the page will look like without actually saving it. It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. Note I have likely fixed the error by now so check the history of the page to see how it was fixed. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 04:13, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your recent edits to Badien Hasso when you modified the page, you introduced unknown parameters. Just because you specify |some_param=some_variable does not always mean that variable will display. The |some_param= must be defined in the template. You can look at the documentation for the template you are using but it is also helpful to use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and ensure that the values you have added are displaying correctly. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the page will look like without actually saving it. It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. Note I have likely fixed the error by now so check the history of the page to see how it was fixed. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 17:09, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

Wow

Hello.

Pretty big addition to Adi ibn Musafir.

-- LightningThrower (talk) 21:32, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, still trying to format and tidy up those citations, let me know if anything stands out Nobedarê Dunav (talk) 22:05, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Adi ibn Musafir, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Islamic historiography was added. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Request to restore removed content on the Wikipedia article "Muzuri (tribe)" (April 26, 2026 edit)

Muzuri (tribe)

Dear Nobedarê Dunav,

I am writing regarding your edit performed on April 26, 2026, on the Wikipedia article titled "Muzuri (tribe)", in which you removed the following passage:

"They live to the west of Margavar and west of Lake Urmia. Muzuri is one of the oldest Kurdish tribes in Kurdistan."

I formally request that you restore this removed content. The geographical distribution of the Muzuri tribe relative to Margavar and Lake Urmia, alongside its historical standing as an established tribal entity in the region, is thoroughly documented across regional historiography, Ottoman and Persian archival records, and European ethnographic literature.

While I assume these modifications were made in good faith, the outright removal of relevant geographical and historical attributes rather than requesting additional references or refining the phrasing contravenes Wikipedia’s core editing policy on preserving useful knowledge (WP:PRESERVE). Deleting established historical context without prior discussion on the Talk page compromises the entry's factual balance and neutrality (WP:NPOV).

I trust that editorial decisions on the platform remain strictly anchored in Neutral Point of View and Academic Verifiability (WP:V). I kindly ask that you restore the removed text. Should you have methodological queries regarding specific citations or wording, I welcome an open discussion on the article's Talk page to achieve a consensus grounded in reliable secondary sources (WP:RS).

Sincerely,

Ahmed A Issa Ahmed A Issa (talk) 17:39, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

If we go by WP:BURDEN, then it's not on me to disprove something that hasn't been proven, but on you to supply a specific, citable source for this specific claim for it to be restored. Nobedarê Dunav (talk) 19:03, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi Nobedarê Dunav,

I agree that WP:BURDEN places the responsibility on the editor seeking to retain or restore text to provide specific, citable sources.

The deleted passage contains two distinct claims one geographical and one historical and I am providing reliable secondary documentation (WP:RS) for each:

1. Geographical Distribution (Margavar and Lake Urmia)

The territorial range of the Muzuri tribe extending west of Margavar and Lake Urmia is documented across regional historiography and 19th/20th-century ethnographic surveys, corresponding precisely to their recorded historical range. An 8th-century manuscript (c. 740 C.E.) edited by Vladimir Minorsky (1877–1966) details this exact territorial extent stretching from Urmia toward Mosul.

2. Historical Status and Antiquity

Historical scholarship explicitly characterizes the Muzuri as one of the ancient historical tribal entities of the region, as evidenced by primary and secondary academic references:

In the tribal register of Pîr Emer Qubeysî's Mişûr, one of the sacred Yazidi manuscripts that were composed in 1207 C.E., Muzuri tribe is mentioned as one of the tribes attributed as Mirîds of the Yazidi saint, Pîr Emer Qubeysî and his lineage.

Evliya Çelebi (1611–1684), Seyahatname (1655, Vol. 4: Kürdistān): In his account of Kurdistan, Çelebi explicitly notes that the Mongol authorities/historians historically designated the fortress locality of Akre (Ākrē) as"Till Muzuri" (The Hill of the Muzuri). And In his description of the citadel-city of Amadiya (Āmēdī), he explicitly records that its two main historical gates were named after the region's dominant tribal entities: "bâb-ı Muzuri" (the Muzuri Gate) and "Zıbarı kapusu" (the Zibari Gate).

Albert T. Olmstead (1880–1945), History of Assyria (1923, p. 337):Explicitly notes: "The plain gives way to a deep, narrow gorge, sheer into the heart of the limestone mountain, whose Misuri clan of Kurds preserves the name of the ancient Musri."

Muhammad Amin Zaki Beg (1880–1948), Ḵulāṣat TārīḴ Kurd ū Kurdistān (1931, p. 79 in Arabic version): "A sect/group called Musri—which is the origin of the clans currently known as the (Misuri / Mizuri) tribe—dwelt, as it does now, during the reign of King Sennacherib between the two tributaries of the Khazer River."

Abbas al-Azzawi (1890–1971), Mawsūʿat 'Ashā'ir al-'Irāq (1947, Vol. 2, p. 135): Writing verbatim: Muzuri tribes: Considered among the oldest Kurdish tribes." ("قبائل مزوري: تعد من أقدم القبائل الكردية.")

There are additional sources supporting this, and I am compiling a fully itemized bibliography of Ottoman, Persian, and Orientalist references documenting the Muzuri tribe to post here on the Talk page.

In light of these verifiable references, I formally request that you restore this removed content under WP:PRESERVE. The geographical distribution of the Muzuri tribe relative to Margavar and Lake Urmia, alongside its historical standing, is thoroughly supported by reliable scholarship. Should you prefer refining the phrasing to reflect the precise terminology of these sources (WP:RS), I welcome an open discussion here on the Talk page.

Best regards,

Ahmed A Issa Ahmed A Issa (talk) 21:11, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

Hello Nobedarê Dunav (@Nobedarê Dunav),

More than three days have passed since I responded to your initial edit summary invoking WP:BURDEN regarding the article "Muzuri (tribe)". You removed two key historical and geographical sections on the premise that they were unsourced. In response, I opened a structured discussion on the Talk page and provided exhaustive academic citations—ranging from 8th, 13th and 17th-century Ottoman geographical surveys (Seyahatname by Evliya Çelebi) to early 20th-century Orientalist and regional historiography. Additional primary and secondary sources supporting these facts remain available. Yet, you have neither responded to the talk page proposal nor restored the removed content.

In accordance with Wikipedia's core guideline on Assuming Good Faith (WP:AGF), I want to believe that your absence from the discussion is simply due to not having read my detailed response yet. If this is the case, I request that you promptly reinstate the two deleted sections, as there remains no policy-based or evidentiary justification to omit them.

However, if your silence is a deliberate choice to ignore the Talk page thread while leaving fully documented content excised, it raises serious procedural and ethical concerns regarding Conflict of Interest (WP:COI), Neutral Point of View (WP:NPOV), and Point-of-View Pushing (WP:POVPUSH). Your user profile and editing history reflect an exclusive, specialized focus on Yezidi religious history and theology. Anyone versed in regional historiography is aware of the historical encounters and conflicts between the Muzuri tribe and Yezidi communities. The unilateral deletion of verified, peer-reviewed historical text from Muzuri-related articles strongly suggests an underlying religious bias, sectarian hostility, or Islamophobic framing regarding documented historical events.

Personal religious convictions, anti-Muslim sentiments (Islamophobia), or historical grievances regarding past tribal conflicts must never dictate content on Wikipedia. Using editorial privileges or silence to suppress verifiable historical documentation constitutes a direct violation of Wikipedia’s foundational rules. Editors are strictly required to remain objective, set aside personal hostilities, and uphold strict encyclopedic neutrality.

Applicable Wikipedia Policies and Guidelines:

1. WP:BURDEN & WP:V (Verifiability): The burden of evidence requested under WP:BURDEN has been fully met by providing reliable, verifiable secondary and primary citations on the Talk page. Continuous deletion of cited text violates verifiability standards.

2. WP:PRESERVE: Wikipedia policy explicitly mandates that valid content should be preserved, refined, and cited, rather than swept away through indiscriminate deletion.

3. WP:NPOV & WP:POVPUSH: Erasing documented historical references to downplay a tribe's historical footprint or align an article with personal sectarian views violates the Neutral Point of View policy.

4. WP:SILENCE: Under Wikipedia's consensus policy, when a policy-backed, fully cited proposal is submitted on a Talk page and receives no counter-arguments or refutations after a reasonable timeframe, silence implies consensus (WP:SILENCE).

5. WP:BATTLEGROUND (WP:BATTLE): Utilizing Wikipedia to prosecute historical rivalries, display hostility toward specific tribes or religious groups, or push a biased agenda is forbidden under conduct guidelines.

I formally request that you act with encyclopedic objectivity, leave personal or religious hostility aside, and refrain from deleting documented historical facts concerning the Muzuri tribe. I expect you to either restore the verified text immediately or participate in a transparent, policy-grounded discussion on the Talk page.

Sincerely,

Ahmed A. Issa

````Ahmed A Issa (talk) 21:16, 25 August 2026 (UTC)