 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
I have a question about some of the phrases:
- Zurzakxoj (Зурзакхой) – considered to be one of the most indigenous
- what makes it more indigeous then the other tribes?
- Enganoj (Энганой) – Noxchmaxkaxoj (Нохчмахкахой) – populates whole Chechen republic. It is considered that Muslim preachers originate there.
- Wahabi's or the first islam preachings?
- Yalxoj (Ялхой) – Noxchmaxkaxoj (Нохчмахкахой) – forced by Maskhadov to move to Azerbaijan. Following information agencies, they gave ultimatum to Maskhadov demanding him to capitulate to federals.
- What happened after Maschadov was replaced by Kadyrov? Did they come back?--Hardscarf 22:03, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Ethnic versus Impure teips
editI think we should probably not use the term "impure" in English as it can be mispercieved as a slur. Like, in Turkish or Chechen it might not be a problem, but in English, calling people "impure in blood"... might not fly. --Yalens (talk) 22:20, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Etymology from Taifa
editWould it be helpful to general readers to note the origin of the word teip in the word wikt:طائفة (wikt:taifa) and the fact that the word taifa is used in English by scholars of the history of the Iberian Peninsula [1]? All of that could go in Wiktionary, but at present there are no entries in Wiktionary (and none at m-w.com either) for English words of Arabic, (Castilian) Spanish, or Chechen origin taifa, taip, taipa, or teip. (...if you don't count wikt:taifa an English word of Arabic origin in English Wikipedia, for the reason that it's identified there as a Swahili word rather than an English or Arabic one.) --Hoziron (talk) 14:22, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Teip. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/69yj3iOJe?url=http://ingush.narod.ru/lang/i-r.htm to http://ingush.narod.ru/lang/i-r.htm
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719234640/http://www.latautonomy.org/TraditionalSocialOrganisationChechens.pdf to http://www.latautonomy.org/TraditionalSocialOrganisationChechens.pdf
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719234640/http://www.latautonomy.org/TraditionalSocialOrganisationChechens.pdf to http://www.latautonomy.org/TraditionalSocialOrganisationChechens.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:54, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
editThe following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:37, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
editThe following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:04, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Aukh
editWikiEditor1234567123 Assalamu Aleykum, i want to continue the topic we had in my talk page here instead. I think there was a bit miscommunication there, i thought you meant that you wanted to add Ingush teips (Vyappi and Ghuloy) to the Aukh section in teip list of Chechen tukkhums. I noticed that you added it below Ingush Shahars, i dont think this makes any sense since Aukhoy are Chechens and not an Ingush ethno-territorial society (Shahar) although i agree that some teips have Ingush origins. The two Dagestani sources you listed also say Aukhoy (Chechenci Akkinci) are Chechens, every census lists them as either Chechens or Akkinci-Chechenci too. I'll remove the Aukhoy section from Ingush teips okay? Ghuloy teip is already under Orstkhoy (Guloy) and Vyappi is already designated as the Fyappi shahar anyway in the Ingush list.
Also regarding Z'ogoi, the two Dagestani sources you provided don't have a source for their claim that Z'ogoi is an Ingush teip, i think we need to have a better source before we can also claim it's Ingush. The Chechen lingist Arsakhanov was the first one that connected it to Ingush in 1959 i think, but he only compared Z'ogoi to "Zakoi Nekye" in Ingushetia. He didn't elaborate much on it and didn't really claim that it's the same thing to be honest. I checked the Russian Wikipedia article on Z'ogoi and found that Malsagov mentions "Zokoev" (that came from Chechnya due to blood feud) among Ingush clans but i am not sure if he says it's connected to Z'ogoi teip itself, i can't find a pdf file of the source though (Происхождение ингушских фамилий, Мальсагов Х., Ингушетия, 2004 г.), do you have it? In my opinion we need an ethnographic source that elaborates on Zakoy-Z'ogoi connection (if any) like for example the Aukh Vyappi we know they are Fyappi due to their Teptar where they state they come from Tyarsh, Ingushetia. Otherwise one could assume the Vyappi in Aukh are connected to their neighboring Biltoy teip which has a big branch called "Vyappi nekye". Goddard2000 (talk) 11:07, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
- Wa alaikum assalam. I thought since neither you or Takhigeran Umar opposed me adding the two teips, there no was problem. I didn't add Z'ogoi because I thought it's disputed as Umar explained that, by their DNA tests, they're connected with Nokchmakhkoi. Maybe you overlooked my edit? When I added Ovkhoi, I didn't intend to write them as an Ingush Shahar, rather I thought that as a way to write that those two teips live in Aukh. Perhaps, I will write something like "teips also in Aukh" instead of just "Ovkhoy"? What do you think? WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 11:27, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
- I think it is unnecessary to be honest, if we do that then we will have mentioned these teips 3 times in the same list, i liked your edit link where for example when you click on Väppiy then you are redirected to Aukh Vyappi in the Fyappi article instead of the whole article. In my opinion that is enough but maybe we can compromise and add a note to Väppiy which explains that it's both Ingush and Chechen? Goddard2000 (talk) 11:55, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
- But still, then you have Väppiy included in the Chechen list but not in the Ingush list. That doesn't seem fair, doesn't it? WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 12:09, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
- Are Väppiy not already included? There is a Fyappi Shahar section isn't there? i mean they are the same thing but for Ingush it's a Shahar and Chechens a teip. I don't really understand the problem.. i think the list would be too cluttered but anyway. I guess i can agree to adding it to the Ingush list since you insist on it, but can we add it to the Fyappi shahar then? it would make more sense than creating a new section no? Ghuloy i guess are already included in Orstkhoy, i don't think we need to add another section for it either to be honest. Goddard2000 (talk) 12:18, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
- No, they're not quite the same. Lemme break it down for you: the Fyappin society consists of many teips itself and historically inhabited Ingushetia, but in 17th–18th centuries small part of the Fyappins left Ingushetia and migrated to Aukh, there forming into a teip named Vyappiy. Btw, Vyappiy are most likely derived from Torshkhoy, because in the teptar, they refer to Tarsh as their forefather. Now back to the list, if you mean having Vyappiy like this:
- Are Väppiy not already included? There is a Fyappi Shahar section isn't there? i mean they are the same thing but for Ingush it's a Shahar and Chechens a teip. I don't really understand the problem.. i think the list would be too cluttered but anyway. I guess i can agree to adding it to the Ingush list since you insist on it, but can we add it to the Fyappi shahar then? it would make more sense than creating a new section no? Ghuloy i guess are already included in Orstkhoy, i don't think we need to add another section for it either to be honest. Goddard2000 (talk) 12:18, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
- But still, then you have Väppiy included in the Chechen list but not in the Ingush list. That doesn't seem fair, doesn't it? WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 12:09, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
- I think it is unnecessary to be honest, if we do that then we will have mentioned these teips 3 times in the same list, i liked your edit link where for example when you click on Väppiy then you are redirected to Aukh Vyappi in the Fyappi article instead of the whole article. In my opinion that is enough but maybe we can compromise and add a note to Väppiy which explains that it's both Ingush and Chechen? Goddard2000 (talk) 11:55, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
- Väppiy (Russian: Вяппий),
- then it seems okay, but then you have Vyappiy being in a separate Aukh section in the Chechen list, while in the Ingush section in the Fyappin section. In other words, it creates some confusion. Also, Väppiy have been long part of the Ovkhoi/Aukh society so it would be sense to write them under Aukh section in the Ingush list (the Aukh section name being "teips in Aukh" and not "Ovkhoy" because they're mostly a Chechen ethnic group), but for the sake of not continuing this argument, I will just add it to the Fyappin Shahar section if you have no further opposition to it. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 15:48, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
- Yes lets just keep Väppiy in both Fyappin Shahar and Ovkhoy for Chechens, less confusion that way. Goddard2000 (talk) 17:26, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
- then it seems okay, but then you have Vyappiy being in a separate Aukh section in the Chechen list, while in the Ingush section in the Fyappin section. In other words, it creates some confusion. Also, Väppiy have been long part of the Ovkhoi/Aukh society so it would be sense to write them under Aukh section in the Ingush list (the Aukh section name being "teips in Aukh" and not "Ovkhoy" because they're mostly a Chechen ethnic group), but for the sake of not continuing this argument, I will just add it to the Fyappin Shahar section if you have no further opposition to it. WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 15:48, 19 August 2023 (UTC)