Talk:Muslim conquest of Khorasan

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Muslim conquest of Khorasan article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Iran Low‑importance

	Iran portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Middle East / Medieval / Early Muslim

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Middle Eastern military history task force
	Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)
	Early Muslim military history task force (c. 600 – c. 1600)

Suggestion: Merge Islamic conquest of Afghanistan with this Article

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this informal discussion was No consensus to merge. No action to follow. (non-admin closure) — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 14:58, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I Suggest the previous article be merged with this one since early Muslim sources do not mention "Afghanistan" as a separate territory. The Term "Khorasan" in Muslim sources refers to the modern Iranian provinces of Khorasan as well as Tajikistan and Afghanistan and parts of Turkmenistan (if not all of it), and when these sources speak about the Conquest of Khorasan they usually mention this area as a whole. The other parts of the article could be gathered in a separate part such as "Khorasan under Muslim Rule".--باسم (talk) 11:28, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ahendra: what do you think?--باسم (talk) 09:57, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support I think it's a good idea.--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 07:09, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose First, what constitutes Afghanistan (i.e., its people, history, culture, and geography) has always (for the most part) been connected to South Asia (i.e., the Indian subcontinent). Secondly and most importantly, the conquest of Khorasan was completed within 5 years in the 7th century, but the conquest of Afghanistan took place 100s of years later by completely different armies. Those Muslim sources made clear that Afghanistan was not part of Khorasan but connected to Hind (India).--Mir Ahmad Shah (talk) 13:45, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Khorasan's article is poorly sourced and doesn't include all places and events. The conquest of Khorasan was quite long affair and extended into many countries of Central Asia. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 20:15, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Muslim conquest of Khorasan covers a wider area than Afghanistan, and the article focusses on an earlier period. The Muslim conquests of Afghanistan is, however, well-sourced and independently notable. I therefore think that two should remain distinct as merging to Muslim conquest of Khorasan would unreasonably weight later conquests in Afghanistan. Klbrain (talk) 09:51, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.