Talk:Qutb ud-Din Aibak

Untitled

Could somebody please give me some hint on how to read this name???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sephinelix (talk • contribs) 00:58, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Name is pronounced "Kutub ud deen Ab-buck" Poloplayers (talk) 20:37, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

POV

There are many slanted, biased, and categorical statements in this article which need to be removed or replaced. For example, the latest version of the article described Ghowr as a "miniscule" province of Afghanistan. Stick with the facts and avoid acrimony.

It would be very interesting to learn whether Qutb-ud-din Aybak has any connections or relations to al-Muizz Izz-ad-Din Aybak Mamluk-Sultan (1250 - 1257) in Egypt or not. If both are from the same Turkish tribe, it would be an easy explanation for their war against the Il-Khanat in Persia together with the Mongol rulers of Kipchak.

WP:INDIA Banner/Delhi Addition

Note: {{WP India}} Project Banner with Delhi workgroup parameters was added to this article talk page because the article falls under Category:Delhi or its subcategories. Should you feel this addition is inappropriate , please undo my changes and update/remove the relavent categories to the article -- Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 15:47, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality tag

I have added a neutrality tag because the introduction is a hagiography. I haven't read the rest, and I don't know much about this era, but I suspect that the whole article needs a thorough overhaul. For a start the unqualified description of him as "Emperor of India" looks like retrospective wishful thinking. Choalbaton (talk) 15:46, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

....

is there a wish. just tell me...i'll turn the world upside down for you..AIBAK... sleep sleep sleep... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.203.245.72 (talk) 07:28, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Meaning of the name

Qutb-ud-din Aibak (Arabic: قطب الدين أيبك‎, Persian: قطب الدین ایبک‎; lit. "Axis of the Faith") - as I know Qut-ud-din is Axis of the Faith, but Aibak is just a name which can mean Moon-Bey or Bear-Bey in Turkic languages. Bests, Ali-al-Bakuvi (talk) 17:25, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Continuing edit war by user:Shivabhawani

Instead of edit warring via IPs(121.243.101.233, 121.243.101.233) and his current user name, perhaps Shivabhawani can provide verifiable sources to support his opinions. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:25, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

I am new and not a war. I have given a Verifiable Source for my edit.

Dear “Kansas Bear “, I am sorry .I am not and will not involve in the edit war or for that matter in any kind of war. It is only because I am new to Wikipedia editing and learning that I need to check “talk” page after every edit. I will take care in future.

Now regarding my content edit.

I have changed the text about death cause. The previous version says :

“He died while playing polo in Lahore.[4]

The Reference 4 is “ Dynastic Chart The Imperial Gazetteer of India, v. 2, p. 368.

First I am not denying the fact “death during polo”. I am only giving more information. Second “The Dynastic Chart can-not be a reference of/ and does not give any information about “death cause”, so it seems you are defending this fact without a reference.

I have given four references (Books name along with Publishers Name and publisher place) and you are telling that these are questionable.

1.इतिहास की भूली बिसरी कहानियां, सूर्या भारती प्रकाशन दिल्ली 2. अजेय अग्नि, हिन्दी साहित्य सदन, करोल बाग नई दिल्ली 3. हिस्ट्री ऑफ लाहौर, शब्बीर पब्लिकेशंस लाहौर, 1902 4. गुलामे शाह, संस्करण 1875

Request don’t behave like this with prospective and new editors of Wikipedia, who want to enhance the knowledge based on the maximum available reference.

--Shivabhawani (talk) 11:06, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

I've been asked to comment here. We really do deprecate old sources, and in particular those from the Raj era. I cannot translate the ones mentioned above (English and gibberish are my only languages) but they do appear to fall into the category of sources we should try to avoid. Surely, there must be more recent references available somewhere? - Sitush (talk) 11:52, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

• This popped up on my watchlist, so providing the translation and context for the sources quoted above:

1. इतिहास की भूली बिसरी कहानियां, सूर्या भारती प्रकाशन दिल्ली --> Itihāsa kī Bhūlī Bisarī Kahāniyāṁ, Sūryā Bhāratī Prakāśana, Dillī --> Forgotten Stories of History, Surya Bharti Publishing, Delhi
2. अजेय अग्नि, हिन्दी साहित्य सदन, करोल बाग नई दिल्ली --> Ajēya Agni, Hindī Sāhitya Sadana, Karōla Bāga Na'ī Dillī --> Invincible Fire, Hindi Literature House, Karol Bagh, New Delhi
3. हिस्ट्री ऑफ लाहौर, शब्बीर पब्लिकेशंस लाहौर, 1902 --> Hisṭrī ŏpha lāhaura, śabbīra pablikēśansa lāhaura, 1902 --> History of Lahore, Lahore Shabbir Publications, 1902
4. गुलामे शाह, संस्करण 1875 --> Gulāmē śāha, Sanskaraṇa 1875 --> Gulame Shah, Edition 1875

As is quite obvious this appears to be some sort of a copy-paste of names without context, authors, page numbers or anything. This theory though is not something which has any purchase in reliable sources. If the OP doesn't like the source included there's tons of them on gbooks and gscholar, none of which seem to propagate this playing polo with a human head bit. In fact the title of the first reference itself is a giveaway -- "forgotten". —SpacemanSpiff 06:53, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Dear SpacemanSpiff and Sitush,

If one doesn't know about something, it doesn't mean that something is not true. I have never seen the Lord Rama and Lord Krishna and the Epic Ramayana and Epic Mahabharata doesn't have ISBN No also.But i fully believe.

Anyway Please provide the following clarifications:

1. What is your definition of Reliable Source.Only books written by Western Authors and published by western publishers?

2. How a warrior which covered thousands of miles on horse and fought numerous wars on horse back can die while playing POLO. By Heart attack OR by falling from Horse.Please explain the logic which can be believed.

Further Please reply about my clarification sought regarding The Reference 4 is “ Dynastic Chart The Imperial Gazetteer of India, v. 2, p. 368.

Further I will do more Personal research on this fact and get back to you.

Shivabhawani (talk) 09:47, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

PLEASE LET ME KNOW IF I CAN EDIT THE CHANGE

Please let me know if i can edit the changes based on my discussion.

--Shivabhawani (talk) 11:09, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Judging from the comments of Sitush and SpacemanSpiff, I would say you do not have consensus to re-add that information or "sources". --Kansas Bear (talk) 14:05, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Template:Islam in South Asia

I like to add this template to this page but not sure what the problem is. This page is part of a series on Islam in South Asia. Why is not useful? Please help! 65.95.136.96 (talk) 14:57, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Qutb al-Din Aibak.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:21, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Lakh-bakhsh

"Lakh-bakhsh" has recently been added to the infobox as a title. The source cited in the article body does not state that it was a royal title: as Minhaj suggests, it was an epithet given by others for his charity (as Minhaj states). Is there any source for the assertion that this was a royal title adopted by Qutb al-Din? utcursch | talk 06:10, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

@Utcursch: "Lakh Baksh" has been in the infobox for years - Does it neccessarily need to be a royal title to be mentioned in the infobox ? Plus, the main reason is I supposed is due to the meaning of the title - Proudyicon is adding that the title means forgiver of thousand people (inserting without a reliable source) - whereas our body states that it simply means - giver of Lakhs. Please cite a reliable source that means "forgiver of thousand peoples".

Any comments @Utcursch: regarding the meaning of the title. Re Packer&Tracker (talk) 16:37, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

As Template:Infobox royalty mentions, the parameter is for substantive titles, not general epithets used by others for praising the person. utcursch | talk 19:32, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

@Utcursch: If this is the case - then we should remove this epithet alltogether from the infobox- albeit, I am astounded that this title survived in the infobox for such a long time. Cheers. Re Packer&Tracker (talk) 01:38, 11 March 2023 (UTC)