Talk:Langah Sultanate

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles

Pakistan Low‑importance

	Pakistan portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Reason of undoing my edit

Hey @Sutyarashi! I just want to ask you on which basis you undid my edit?

If the census can be used for Rajput reference why the 1911 official census can not be cited for Jat reference?

Similarly they are several historical sources of their Jatt origin out of which I added one but you removed it?

Punjab has several tribes which can be found in both Jats and Rajputs. As far Langah some even attributed them an independent tribe. Even in the Ain e Akbari they are mentioned along with Jatts, not with Rajput. However the point is on which basis you undid the revision when they same category of sources/citations are linked for Rajput reference?

Please explain it otherwise I am going to open case with someone else with better rights than you Jee Fateh (talk) 09:19, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They are rajpoots obsessed hahaha Islamichistorian1 (talk) 15:02, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should open a case. It's been over a year and he hasn't responded. @Jee Fateh Shogunenjoyer3234 (talk) 00:10, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox map

@पाटलिपुत्र: Hi Pat, just wanted to ask about the map in the infobox where you have set out the territory of the Langah sultanate. From having a look at the source, it doesnt detail the exact limits of the territory held by the Sultanate. I believe Schwatzberg's general outline would be more appropriate as little other information has been provided but just wanted to know your thoughts as well. Ixudi (talk) 17:20, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ixudi:, you may be right, but I guess I did not find the Sultanate of Multan in Schwatzberg's maps. Do you have a specific page number where it appears? पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 18:10, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not the Sulatnate of Multan exactly but the Langas are shown on page 139. Link: https://dsal.uchicago.edu/reference/schwartzberg/pager.html?object=076

I believe you've already made a map with this information in a appropriate form so it may be worth adding that to the infobox instead. See Template:South Asia in 1525 CE. Ixudi (talk) 18:14, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Schwartzberg only gives a general area, but on the other hand the History of civilizations of Central Asia details the specific cities they held (p.305). This information allows for a certain understanding of the outline of their territory, although possibly minimalistic. Template:South Asia in 1525 CE is rather intended as a general depiction of the political situation in South Asia at that point of time, but is not very informative regarding the precise territory of the Langahs... पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 18:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

From having a read of page 305, there is little to no information regarding the westernmost or eastermost extent of the sultanate. The only information I can find on its territory comes from the following quote:

"He wrested the principality of Shorkot from Ghazi Khan and extended his control up into Chiniot."

So all we can really say for sure is that the sultanate was based in Multan and expanded into Chiniot. From my perspective, this is not enough information to create a map from. Ixudi (talk) 18:57, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Whenever possible I like to use Schwartzberg, but in the absence of better material, it is common practice to establish an illustrative map based on literary material, i.e. based on cities known to have belonged to the realm in question (here especially Multan, Shorkot and Chiniot). We also know that D.G. Khan and D.I. Khan were under the jurisdiction of the Langahs (see article). Of course it would be better to have a map to copy directly from, but Schwartzberg apparently overlooked them. You can of course use my other map Template:South Asia in 1525 CE if you think it is better, but I'm afraid it would not be an improvement for the basic reader. पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 20:07, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please review sources for the origin carefully!

Please review the attached sources carefully, especially when it comes to origins. The claims for the Baloch origin are inherently faulty, given that Abd al-Haqq misidentifies Budhan Khan as the founder of the state, when in reality he was the grandson of the actual founder, Rai Sahra Langah. And as far as I know, Baloch rulers haven't historically taken the title of "Rai". Shogunenjoyer3234 (talk) 05:37, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from engaging in original research, see WP:OR. If you wish to demonstrate that the source is inaccurate then please find a reliable secondary source that specifically calls it as such. Ixudi (talk) 09:16, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken, but the misidentification of Budhan Khan is present in the very sources that are already listed. That should still be mentioned. Shogunenjoyer334 (talk) 15:38, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please let me know if the edits are acceptable. I've placed the full quotation of the source already mentioned, showing the misidentification. And I did not include anything beyond that. @Ixudi Shogunenjoyer334 (talk) 15:59, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

None of the sources say that Abd Al-Haqq was incorrect. You pointing out that he is seems to again be a case of WP:OR. Ixudi (talk) 16:06, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is it disputed whether Rai Sahra was the first sultan? If so, then yeah I agree that there needs to be a source specifying that Abd al-Haqq is wrong. But it seems like it's consensus that Sahra was the first in his line, so is it really original research to point out any conclusion which points to another ruler, like Budhan, being the founder is false? Genuine question, do advise. @Ixudi Pindari022 (talk) 03:54, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]