User Talk: Nobedarê Dunav

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.

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:

{{Bq|1=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 {{code|<nowiki>{{Re|</nowiki>Northernhenge<nowiki>}}</nowiki>}}. (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:

{{Bq|1=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 {{code|<nowiki>{{Re|</nowiki>Scope creep<nowiki>}}</nowiki>}}. (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)