 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Rewrite edit
In the next few days, I will be rewriting the article. All cooperation are welcome. TrangaBellam (talk) 11:31, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
Redirect edit
- पाटलिपुत्र, why does this deserve a new page? The current version barely makes any sense - you cannot copy trash from other pages or write an entire article basing on Dani. It is blindingly obvious that these are all oral legends transmitted across Humza lores: Reginald clearly states to such effect, something you didn't. More: 1 and 2.
- After a day of searching online (and offline) sources, I did not come across any single historian-of-repute (except Dani, whose scholarship is increasingly critiqued) who discusses the dynasty. Whatever might be sourced from HISTRS can be covered at Gilgit#Trakhàn_Dynasty. TrangaBellam (talk) 17:11, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Dani's most detailed narrative is presented in History of Northern Areas (1991) (p. 162 onward.) I leave it to you about whether anything in the following pages can be relied upon.
- He concedes in every alternate page that there exists nil historical evidence to corroborate any damn event, that H. Khan's recording of history is heavily faulty (consult this and sources cited therein for more information on Khan and his sources) with nonsensical dates, and that Rais Khan's is an hagiography which often contradicts the former. Still, Dani is hell-bent on extracting a history of the region. TrangaBellam (talk) 17:41, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Do you have any better information about who succeeded the Patola Shahis in Gilgit? I don't think a redirect to Gilgit#Trakhàn_Dynasty is any better, as the paragraph there makes even less sense and is terribly sourced. At least in this article we have a bunch of sources (admitedly mainly Dani) trying to give an account of this dynasty/period. It would be more productive and informative to balance this article with alternative views, or even (sourced) criticisms of Dani's reconstruction given in History of Civilizations of Central Asia, if they exist. We only go by what sources tell us. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 20:07, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Dani is (self-admittedly) in the realms of speculation - sorry, he doesn't count as a RS. I will let Kautilya3 take a look. If no scholar has bothered to document the premodern history of Gilgit, why shall we?
- I have read much on the Patola Shahis but nothing remarkable about their successors. TrangaBellam (talk) 10:26, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Do you have any better information about who succeeded the Patola Shahis in Gilgit? I don't think a redirect to Gilgit#Trakhàn_Dynasty is any better, as the paragraph there makes even less sense and is terribly sourced. At least in this article we have a bunch of sources (admitedly mainly Dani) trying to give an account of this dynasty/period. It would be more productive and informative to balance this article with alternative views, or even (sourced) criticisms of Dani's reconstruction given in History of Civilizations of Central Asia, if they exist. We only go by what sources tell us. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 20:07, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
Recording that a related discussion just took place at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard: History of Civilizations of Central Asia: RS?. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 16:47, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Whereupon we arrived at a consensus that Dani's "history of this dynasty" shall be explicitly noted to be a retelling of Gilgit traditions/lore. TrangaBellam (talk) 13:21, 9 January 2022 (UTC)