Talk:Hazaras: Difference between revisions

	Hazaras was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result November 25, 2009 Good article nominee Not listed

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

‹ The template below (WikiProject Hazara) is being considered for deletion. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. › Hazara (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hazara, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.HazaraWikipedia:WikiProject HazaraTemplate:WikiProject HazaraHazara articles Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Ethnic groups B‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks: Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks: Meta-tasks: Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project. Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution: Category:Unassessed Ethnic groups articles Category:Ethnic groups articles needing merge action Category:Ethnic groups articles needing infoboxes Category:Ethnic groups articles needing reassessment Category:Ethnic groups articles needing attention Iyer Peruvian people Start an article: Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Afghanistan B‑class Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Afghanistan, a project to maintain and expand Afghanistan-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AfghanistanWikipedia:WikiProject AfghanistanTemplate:WikiProject AfghanistanAfghanistan articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Central Asia B‑class High‑importance Hazaras is part of WikiProject Central Asia, a project to improve all Central Asia-related articles. This includes but is not limited to Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Tibet, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Xinjiang and Central Asian portions of Iran, Pakistan and Russia, region-specific topics, and anything else related to Central Asia. If you would like to help improve this and other Central Asia-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.Central AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Central AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Central AsiaCentral Asia articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Iran C‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Pakistan: Balochistan B‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Balochistan, Pakistan. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Asia: Mongols C‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Asia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject AsiaTemplate:WikiProject AsiaAsia articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Mongols (assessed as Mid-importance).

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE. Stability Information East 2 (talk · contribs) has been paid by Stability Operations Information Center (SOIC-East). Their editing has included contributions to this article. role accounts as disclosed in user page

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3

This page has archives. Sections older than 150 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Hamkar 99, explain to me, please, why information based on reliable sources may be unacceptable? In my opinion, it is on your part that there is a violation of the WP:NPV rules. Look at what sources and what authors I refer to: Great Russian Encyclopedia - perfect valid tertiary source, Elizabeth Emaline Bacon, Sabitov - both PhD, Averyanov, Sattsayev - Candidates of Sciences. All authors meet the requirements prescribed in WP:SCHOLARSHIP.--KoizumiBS (talk) 16:30, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

KoizumiBS, You have been purposefully editing Hazara articles for a long time. The edits you make have not reached a complete consensus. Please put this policy aside, my dear brother.--Hamkar 99 (talk) 16:44, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And how can I reach a consensus with you if you indiscriminately roll back all my edits? Achieving consensus is reaching a version that suits both parties.--KoizumiBS (talk) 17:03, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It has been seen that if anyone wants to edit, you cancel it. You do not allow anyone to correct or delete your edit. You cancel it under several pretexts.--Hamkar 99 (talk) 17:20, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot agree with you. All my edits are based on sources, not my opinion. And a big request not to deviate from the topic of discussion. Please answer better my question: why are you removing the Mongolian peoples template if the sources use terms such as "Hazara Mongols" (Elizabeth Emaline Bacon, Barbara A. West) and "Hazaras - Iranian-speaking Mongols" (Averyanov). Presence both templates with Iranian and Mongolian peoples is explained by the rules described in WP:NPV and WP:CONS pages.--KoizumiBS (talk) 17:32, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear, Tell me why you consider the language and history of the Hazaras to be Mongol while they are a mixed race ethnic group. Please do not consider incorrect and secondary sources.--Hamkar 99 (talk) 17:54, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't call me "dear" without a noun. In the world, all ethnic groups are mixed to one degree or another. The authors of the sources decided that they were connected with the Mongols. Not me. And in general, you unreasonably called secondary sources incorrect. We must rely primarily on secondary sources. See the rules in WP:RSPRIMARY: "Wikipedia articles should be based mainly on reliable secondary sources, i.e., a document or recording that relates or discusses information originally presented elsewhere."--KoizumiBS (talk) 18:16, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hamkar 99 do you have a policy based reason to be reverting very well referenced material? At this point it feels more like WP:IDONTLIKEIT than any policy rationale. The sources seem clear, this is already mentioned and referenced in the article, and your edits could be considered disruptive. Canterbury Tail talk 20:14, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Canterbury Tail Greetings! There are many sources that do not endorse these sources. The important point is that the esteemed User:KoizumiBS has been promoting the Mongolization of the Hazaras for some time based on second-hand sources. I must say that the Hazaras are of mixed race. Thanks!--Hamkar 99 (talk) 20:35, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anywhere in their edits where they claim otherwise. They're not removing the Turkic side, or any other theories as to their origins. They are also not claiming that they're solely of Mongol origin, just providing more details, sources and references for the claims that already exist. They're just adding that there's a lot of sources for the Mongol part and the sources appear to be sound. Based on Wikipedia's policies of Wp:Verifiable and reliable sources, there's no reason for these edits to be excluded. Again, can you provide a policy reason for their edits to be reverted and not included? Canterbury Tail talk 20:51, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Canterbury Tail, See[2] he has made some unacceptable and incorrect changes. For example, one of the changes is that the language of the Hazaras was Mongolian until the nineteenth century, which is not found in any first-hand sources. Thanks!--Hamkar 99 (talk) 21:12, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So you have a question about the validity of one source, that’s not a reason to go around undoing all their edits, especially edits supported already by the article in question and other sources. Take that one source to WP:RS/N. I’ve not come across any decision that GRE is not reliable. And even then that doesn’t explain your blind reversions of all the other edits. Canterbury Tail talk 21:30, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Canterbury Tail Unapproved editing is not just a few. I mentioned the most interesting ones about the Hazara racial roots and the Hazara language. Thanks!--Hamkar 99 (talk) 21:57, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Um hold on, what do you mean by unapproved editing? So you have zero policy reasons to revert the changes, fair enough that means KoizumiBS can reinstate them then yes? Canterbury Tail talk 01:34, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Canterbury Tail That is, it has not been proven that the Hazaras spoke Mongolian until the nineteenth century, or that the Hazaras were certainly of Mongolian origin. Thanks--Hamkar 99 (talk) 04:01, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources claim otherwise, and as a result this falls into Wikipedia's reliable sources and WP:Verifiability policies. Since you've not come up with any policy reason, or any sources otherwise, this appears to be purely a WP:IDONTLIKEIT objection. Additionally please explain what you meant by "unapproved editing is not just a few". Canterbury Tail talk 11:39, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Canterbury Tail User:KoizumiBS, who mentioned the term (Hazara Mongols) in the article, but Sayed Askar Mousavi in Hazaras of Afghanistan has stated that, so far, no document has been obtained by mentioning (Hazara Mongols) and no researcher has spoken about the Mongolian-speaking Hazaras.^[1]--Hamkar 99 (talk) 21:26, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If we turn only to the mention of the Mongolian language, then here are the sources and researchers: 1) Academician Bartold: "back in the 16th century, the Hazaras spoke Mongolian in the northern part of Afghanistan" (in Russian: "еще в XVI веке говорили хазарейцы по-монгольски в северной части Афганистана"); 2) Professor Masson, Candidate of Sciences Romodin: "Even in the 16th century the Mongolian language was widespread among the Hazaras, and a small part of them, apparently, spoke a language close to Mongolian as early as the 19th century".^[2]; 3) Professor Petrushevsky: "As is known, a large mass of the Mongolian population (Hazaras) formed on the territory of Afghanistan, partly retaining their language as early as the 19th century". ^[3] 4) Great Russian Encyclopedia: "until the 19th century Hazaras spoke Mongolian".^[4] In addition, there are also linguistic data, historical sources, data on toponymy, as well as works on population genetics, which I can also quote.--KoizumiBS (talk) 23:32, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Canterbury Tail, I want to inform you that during the discussion I have not seen a rationale for deleting my edits from user Hamkar 99. I'm going to return them with minor adjustments. I guess that deleting sources that meet the requirements of WP:RS, WP:SCHOLARSHIP without a corresponding discussion in WP:RS/N is unacceptable. I guess that the subsequent removal of information from sources will represent a continuation of the edit war and WP:DE.--KoizumiBS (talk) 14:21, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Your sources and text are not claiming that this is 100%, just it's a strong thinking direction from some major scholars and sources and I feel it meets our policies and guidelines. At this point continued removal of sourced information, which is just an extension of what is already sourced and in the articles, with no policy or guideline reason would meet the definition of disruptive editing. Canterbury Tail talk 14:28, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jasoorth, the sources directly speak of the predominance of the Mongolian component: 1) Doctor of Sciences Lutfi Temirkhanov: "the Turkic elements compared to the Mongolian ones played a secondary role".^[1]; 2) The most common among the Hazaras is Y-DNA haplogroup C. According to sources this haplogroup certainly associated with the expansion of the Mongols.^[2] PhD Sabitov: "Y-DNA haplogroup C is certainly associated with the expansion of the Mongols";^[3] PhD Zhabagin: "The high frequency of haplogroup C2-M217 is consistent with the purported Mongolian origin of the Hazaras."^[4] 3) Until the 19th century Hazaras spoke Mongolian.^[5][6][7]--KoizumiBS (talk) 01:08, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Thepowefulhnation: Kindly dont edit war and take your concerns here - you need to establish WP:CONSENSUS. The source you're trying to add is 135 years old and contradicted by present-day WP:RS, including EI3 and Iranica. Kindly see WP:AGE MATTERS and WP:UNDUE. --HistoryofIran (talk) 21:21, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Thepowefulhnation: Please stop adding more WP:AGE MATTERS and WP:UNDUE stuff into the article. Use the talk page. --HistoryofIran (talk) 21:37, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Thepowefulhnation: Third and final time I'm going to ask you to use the talk page. Can you explain how your addition doesn't go against WP:AGE MATTERS and WP:UNDUE? --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:02, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@HistoryofIran: There are a lot of old resources in Wikipedia, so should all of them be removed?--Thepowefulhnation (talk) 22:05, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Thepowefulhnation: This has nothing to do with the matter. Kindly answer my question. --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:06, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@HistoryofIran: I replied that authoritative sources by a well-known author should not be removed.--Thepowefulhnation (talk) 22:10, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Thepowefulhnation: You're still not answering my question. How does your addition not go against WP:AGE MATTERS and WP:UNDUE? If you're not going to reply, I will restore the original revision, as no WP:CONSENSUS has been reached. --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:13, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@HistoryofIran: This is the biggest question to ask why remove old sources? Thanks--Thepowefulhnation (talk) 22:18, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You would get your answer to that question and more if you actually clicked and read the guidelines I linked numerous times. This is the third time you're ignoring my question, this is clearly WP:DISRUPTSIGNS. I will restore the original revision per WP:CONSENSUS. If you revert or attempt something similar without any consensus, I will report you to WP:ANI. --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:22, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thepowefulhnation, hi. This concerns you removing here the information added by Artefactual here. It looks perfectly well-sourced and well-written, and you offered no explanation whatsoever (no edit summary). I have reinstated it, but moved it to the appropriate section, "Origin", because under "Genetics" it was indeed in the wrong spot. If there is anything you want to comment, please do it here before making any other radical edits to this paragraph. Thank you, Arminden (talk) 23:05, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The first sentence is "The Hazaras are an ethnic group and the principal component of the population of Afghanistan, native to, and primarily residing in the Hazarajat region in central Afghanistan and generally scattered throughout Afghanistan."

That can't be right, as Afghanistan is primarily Pashtun? Hazaras number 4 million, Pashtuns around 13million or something. If the sentence is meant to say that The Hazaras are the principal component of the Hazarajat region... well, the sentence needs reworking to reflect that, as that is not what it states when taking into account punctuation. I would edit it with the facts, but I got in trouble one time for editing a first paragraph, so what do you guys think? Mercster (talk) 15:30, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that doesn’t make sense. I removed this unsourced claim, which, at best, is ambiguous. Thanks, @Mercster! —ThorstenNY (talk) 23:21, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ThorstenNY: This content has a source and it is not unclear. Please do not delete the sourced information. See the source Encyclopaedia of Islam. This is not unsourced claim. Thanks--Iampharzad (talk) 01:32, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think this needs to be escalated with @Iampharzad reverting your edit? This is above my pay grade, and frankly something I'm not even interested in dealing with. I'm disabled and about to move cross-town with no friends or family to help, so I've got enough on my plate. ;-) Good luck! Mercster (talk) 03:20, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mercster: This content "The Hazaras are an ethnic group and the principal component of the population of Afghanistan, native to, and primarily residing in the Hazarajat region in central Afghanistan and generally scattered throughout Afghanistan." is absolutely right. Remember that the Hazaras are the principal and one of the largest ethnic groups in Afghanistan. They were by far the largest ethnic group in the past, during 1888–1893 Uprisings of Hazaras, over 60% of Hazaras massacred with some being displaced. Please do not attempt to delete reliable content. Thanks--Iampharzad (talk) 02:14, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Uhhhhh... well, ok? I didn't edit anything, first of all. And I don't need to remember anything. The article stated "The Hazaras are an ethnic group and the principal component of the population of Afghanistan, native to, and primarily residing in the Hazarajat region in central Afghanistan and generally scattered throughout Afghanistan." They may have been their first, but they are not the CURRENT PRINCIPAL COMPONENT OF THE POPULATION OF THE NATION OF AFGHANISTAN.

We've obviously stepped on some very sensitive toes here by deigning to question a clearly incorrect statement on a Wikipedia article. I'll leave you to it. Have "fun." Mercster (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mmmhmm, a look at your talk page is instructive. Have fun! Mercster (talk) 03:22, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs copy editing and I have put it on my list to get to. I see the extended discussions here and I will be scrupulous in trying not to make changes to the substance of what I edit. I ask that if I make changes you disagree with, you will come here to discuss them before simply reverting them. Dgndenver (talk) 04:20, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Based on source and genetic research: The Hazaras cluster with Central Asian populations and they are closer to Turkic populations from Central Asia than to East-Asian or Indo-Iranian populations.

Content in the source: Our study confirms the results of Li et al's study48 that cluster the Hazara population with Central Asian populations, rather than Mongolian populations, which is consistent with ethnological studies.49 Our results further extend these findings, as we show that the Hazaras are closer to Turkic-speaking populations from Central Asia than to East-Asian or Indo-Iranian populations.^[1]

Thank you--Iampharzad (talk) 23:41, 24 August 2022 (UTC) Iampharzad (talk) 23:41, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Iampharzad, these are early studies. See additional studies. The current ones (2019-2020 years research) talk about the predominance of the Mongolian genetic pool: "In our earlier study, results showed that Hazaras have a close genetic affinity with Turkic-speaking (Kazakh, Kyrgyz and Uyghur) and Mongolian people. Admixture and outgroup findings further clarified that Hazara have 57.8% gene pool from Mongolians". (Forensic features and genetic legacy of the Baloch population of Pakistan and the Hazara population across Durand-line revealed by Y chromosomal STRs). "The results from pairwise genetic distances, MDS, PCA, and phylogenetic relationship reconstruction demonstrate that present-day Hazaras are genetically closer to the Turkic-speaking populations (Uyghur, Kazakh, and Kyrgyz) residing in northwest China than with other Central/South Asian populations and Mongolian. Outgroup and admixture f3, f4, f4-ratio, qpWave, and qpAdm results further demonstrate that Hazara shares more alleles with East Asians than with other Central Asians and carries 57.8% Mongolian-related ancestry. Overall, our findings suggest that Hazaras have experienced genetic admixture with the local or neighboring populations and formed the current East-West Eurasian admixed genetic profile after their separation from the Mongolians". (A comprehensive exploration of the genetic legacy and forensic features of Afghanistan and Pakistan Mongolian-descent Hazara). Researchers write that the original core of the Hazaras separated precisely from the Mongols.--KoizumiBS (talk) 22:03, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@KoizumiBS: Contemporary genetic research shows that the Hazaras are much closer to the people of Central Asia, especially the Turkic people of Central Asia, rather than to those of East Asians and the Mongols. Apart from other genetic studies of the Hazaras. See some Hazara DNA tests here For example, [3], [4], [5]], [6]. Thanks--Iampharzad (talk) 12:10, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Iampharzad, I have already answered that these studies have been supplemented in newer. Youtube links are not reliable.--KoizumiBS (talk) 13:18, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@KoizumiBS: In the source I added they mentioned these things about Hazaras, YouTube links are just examples, nothing more.--Iampharzad (talk) 23:06, 3 September 2022 (UTC) Regards--Iampharzad (talk) 00:35, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

KoizumiBS, The language of the Hazara people has more Turkic words than Mongolic. (Hazaragi dialect of Persian infused with many Turkic and a few Mongolic). See the source at Encyclopaedia of Islam.--Iampharzad (talk) 05:44, 3 September 2022 (UTC)^[1][reply]

Regards--Iampharzad (talk) 06:25, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

KoizumiBS, I don't know the reason for my reverting my edits. I explained very well that the Hazaras have much racial relationship with the Turkic people of Central Asia, rather than with the people of East Asia and the Mongols, according to genealogical findings and contemporary sources. Please don't get angry, it can be seen that your edits are a racial bias.--Iampharzad (talk) 00:54, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Iampharzad, the problem is that you removed the text from reliable sources. I did not touch the conclusions given in your source (from 2011 year). I only supplemented these conclusions with the results of recent research (including from 2017-2020 years sources). Moreover, the majority of sources traditionally believe that the ethnogenesis of the Hazaras is primarily associated with the Mongols: Great Russian Encyclopedia,^[1] scholars as Vasily Bartold,^[2] Ármin Vámbéry,^[3] Doctor of Sciences Lutfi Temirkhanov,^[4][5][6] Vadim Masson, Vadim Romodin,^[7] Ilya Petrushevsky,^[8] Elizabeth Emaline Bacon,^[9][10] Barbara A. West,^[11] Yuri Averyanov,^[12] Elbrus Sattsayev^[13]; genetic scientists as Atif Adnan, Allah Rakha,^[14][15] PhD Sabitov,^[16] PhD Zhabagin^[17] and many others. I want to point out that your actions violate the rules described in WP:RS, WP:EW, WP:CONS. Accusation of racial bias is a flagrant violation of the WP:CIV rules.--KoizumiBS (talk) 16:39, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@KoizumiBS: You have already included these sources with their contents in the Hazaras article, there is no need to repeat them. But I have included the contemporary source, which is based on genetic research on the Hazaras, which clearly says are closely related to the Turkic populations of Central Asia rather than Mongolians and East Asians or Indo-Iranians. See again the source [In the heartland of Eurasia: the multilocus genetic landscape of Central Asian populations]^[18]--Iampharzad (talk) 04:38, 5 September 2022 (UTC) Iampharzad (talk) 04:38, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@KoizumiBS: The reliable source content from the Encyclopedia of Islam says that the Hazaras are a principal component of the population of Afghanistan. They speak a Persian dialect with many Turkic and a few Mongolian words.^[19] Also this means that the Hazaras are more closely related to Turkic-speaking or Turkic-descended peoples. Thank you--Iampharzad (talk) 05:02, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I added sources that more up to date. I didn't remove or change the conclusions from the source you added. I supplemented them with new research (including from 2019-2020): "Outgroup and admixture f3, f4, f4-ratio, qpWave, and qpAdm results further demonstrate that Hazara shares more alleles with East Asians than with other Central Asians and carries 57.8% Mongolian-related ancestry. Overall, our findings suggest that Hazaras have experienced genetic admixture with the local or neighboring populations and formed the current East-West Eurasian admixed genetic profile after their separation from the Mongolians";^[20] "Admixture and outgroup findings further clarified that Hazara have 57.8% gene pool from Mongolians".^[15] In addition, you removed information about the most common haplogroup C-M217, also known as C2 or C3: "Y-DNA haplogroup C3 is certainly associated with the expansion of the Mongols"^[21]; "The high frequency of haplogroup C2-M217 is consistent with the Mongolian origin of the Hazaras".^[17] As for the language, Mongolian elements make up 10% of the Hazara vocabulary.^[22] According to Doctor of Sciences Lutfi Temirkhanov, the ancestors of the Hazaras were Mongol-speaking^[4][5] and only after the resettlement, they mixed with the Persian-speaking and Turkic-speaking population: "hordes of Mongol princes and feudal lords found themselves in a Persian-speaking encirclement; they mixed with them, were influenced by the Persian-Tajik culture and gradually adopted the Persian language".^[23] According to him, the Turkic elements compared to the Mongolian ones played a secondary role.^[6] — Preceding unsigned comment added by KoizumiBS (talk • contribs) 11:52, 5 Sep 2022 (UTC)

My 2c: disagreements between different researchers about genetic origings of various language groups of people are not uncommon. So, if there exist relibale sources that support different points of view, they all should reported in the article. Ruslik_Zero 10:11, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This reliable and up-to-date source confirms this and says that "Our study confirms the results of Li et al's study that cluster the Hazara population with Central Asian populations, rather than Mongolian populations, which is consistent with ethnological studies. Our results further extend these findings, as we show that the Hazaras are closer to Turkic-speaking populations from Central Asia than to East-Asian or Indo-Iranian populations."^[1]

Very clear: Hazaras are generally grouped closer to the Central Asian peoples and are closely related to the Turkic peoples populations of Central Asia rather than Mongolians and East Asians or Indo-Iranians.^[1] Thank--Iampharzad (talk) 06:19, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Iampharzad (talk) 06:19, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This information is from 2011. I added the 2019 and 2020 research articles that you removed.--KoizumiBS (talk) 00:30, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]