Talk:Mount Imeon

This article was nominated for deletion on 10 October 2022. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

This page was proposed for deletion by Iskandar323 (talk · contribs) on 10 October 2022.

Central Asia Low‑importance

	Asia portal Mount Imeon is part of WikiProject Central Asia, a project to improve all Central Asia-related articles. This includes but is not limited to Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Tibet, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Xinjiang and Central Asian portions of Iran, Pakistan and Russia, region-specific topics, and anything else related to Central Asia. If you would like to help improve this and other Central Asia-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.Central AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Central AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Central AsiaCentral Asia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mountains Low‑importance

	Mountains portal This article is part of WikiProject Mountains, a project to systematically present information on mountains. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Contributing FAQ for more information), or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MountainsWikipedia:WikiProject MountainsTemplate:WikiProject MountainsMountain articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Article name

Is the title "Mount Imeon" accurate? Generally, we only use "mount" to refer to a specific mountain, but the article says that this is a mountain range that encompasses a number of other, major mountain ranges. We don't say "Mount Himalayas", so it seems like we shouldn't say "Mount Imeon" either. Should the title be "Imeon range" instead? -- Hux (talk) 19:06, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In modern usage that would be so, however that is a dead historical name that I hesitate to alter; it’s used with ‘mount’ in modern sources such as for instance the US Department of State quote, a scientific article etc. The name ‘Imeon Range’ is already taken I'm afraid :-) Apcbg (talk) 07:07, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That article is translated from Bulgarian anyway, so it hardly counts. However I'm curious why when I look up 'Imeon' on google I don't find any non-Bulgarian sites related to the history of Central Asia and the said mountain rage.

Tian Shan

Dear Hux, according to the ‘Ashharatsuyts’ description (presented in detail in Dobrev’s book) and mapping of the mountain (see Eremian’s reconstruction), a significant part of Imeon is extending north of Pamir (the latter being identified by the well known lapis lazuli mine, and the Stone Tower), and the range north of Pamir is Tian Shan. Apcbg (talk) 07:07, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

lol, and Dobrev's a credible source, since... when?!

Mount Imeon

Goddamit, Bulgarians, why do you have to bring over here your nationalistic history and try to sell it as historical. all references are from your fascistic Bulgarian sources. stop it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Torebay (talk • contribs) 21:34, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nationalist Fiction?

The lands in the upper watershed of Oxus River (present day Amu Darya) draining the northern slopes of Hindu Kush, the western slopes of Pamir, and bounded to the north by the Alay Mountains (roughly, northern Afghanistan, and most of Tajikistan) were inhabited by the Bulgars, known to have had their Kingdom of Balhara there since ca. 7th century BC. Apart from Anania Shirakatsi, other historiographers in late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages such as Agathias of Myrina, Theophylact Simocatta, and Michael the Syrian also identify Mount Imeon as an early homeland of the ancient Bulgars. The western and northern foothills of Mount Imeon north of the Bulgar lands were shown on the ‘Ashharatsuyts’ map as inhabited by the Sacae, Massagetae, Hephthalite, and Anariacae people. Those ancient people contributed to the ethnogenesis of the present Uzbeks, Kyrgyz, and Kazakhs.

Wow. Now clearly this needs to be thoroughly verified before being restored; problem is I do not think a source exists to support claims of Bulgars "known" to be living in the Pamir mountains around 800 BC in a "Kingdom of Bulhara" (or Bulgars ever having lived in Iranian Central Asia).--Jhelyam (talk) 16:48, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]