Talk:Tanoli

Kashmir premiere League (KPL) Chairman 2022, Arshad Khan Tanoli. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tanawal (talk • contribs) 09:32, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Abbottabad High Court Bar Association President, Haji Sabir Tanoli — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tanawal (talk • contribs) 09:35, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Government

The rulers of Dir originally held the title of Khan but from June 1897 onwards were styled Nawab Khan Bahadur of the Tanoli tribe. The royal status of the rulers was abolished in 1972 at the same time as most other princes of Pakistan.

Tenure	Rulers of Dir
Unknown dates	Gholam Khan Baba
Unknown dates	Zafar Khan
Unknown dates	Qasem Khan
1863–1874	Ghazzan Khan
1875–1886	Rahmat Allah Khan
1886–1890	Mohammad Sharif Khan (1st time)
1890–1895	Mohammad `Omara Khan
1895 - December 1904	Mohammad Sharif Khan (2nd time)
December 1904 - February 1925	Awrangzeb Badshah Khan
February 1925 - 9 November 1960	Mohammad Shah Jahan Khan
9 November 1960 - 28 July 1969	Mohammad Shah Khosru Khan
28 July 1969	State of Dir dissolved

References

Please define how tanolis are Turkic tribe?

Here the Wikipedia user @McKhan reverting my original data with references he is reverting so i have questions to that illiterate why are u reverting. You are educated or not you can read urdu. In Urdu Wikipedia is showing tanolis as Pashtun and in English Wikipedia is showing turkic tribe even a one person from that caste doesn’t say we are barlas turk? Brother you are in your senses or not? I think you should have drunk you doesn’t see the irrelevant reference are in ref section? Tanolis are afghans origin we have our own state like yousafzae states of dir and swat. Ok if tanolis are turkic then give a relevant references you gave the reference of dam and the person who created province NWFP , so please at least don’t be a hypocrite one, Wikipedia isn’t your family’s property ka which u want u do?? I have request to some other editors to view history in which i 1000 time correct this and write original history instead of this fabricated history but he reverted?

@Discospinster

@Pppery @JJMC89 bot @EighteenFiftyNine @farazkhantanoli782 @Jimfbleak MAKTHAKT (talk) 06:04, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

@callanacc MAKTHAKT (talk) 07:12, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

strictly concerning the genetic information and its assertions

this diff, a revert which re-asserts that two peoples are not connected based on genetic information, piqued my interest. the summary says: "... You need to bring forth some independent and verifiable sources to support your edits." ok, lets verify.

article assertion: "... A genetic analysis of tribes ... found that the most prevalent Y chromosomal haplogroup among the Tanoli is R1b1, with a very small contribution of R1a1, a genetic characteristic unlike Pashtuns."

the source[1] states on pg. 178: "Highest frequencies of R1a1a-M17 occur among Syeds (89.15%), followed by Yousafzai (72.32%), Gujars (61.29%), Tanoli (10.45%) and Jadoon (5.26%)". 10.45% is low, but note the absence of a Pashtun figure, the research conducted by the source did not study Pashtun's as a distinct ethnic group. Yousafzai and Jadoon yes, Pashtun no. ^{(also see how Yousafazai and Jadoon, two groups currently listed on wikipedia as being Pashtun tribes, bracket Tanoli here, things are rarely simple)}

The confusion may come from this statement later in the source on pg. 221: "Pashtun exhibit high frequency of R1a1a-M17 (51.02%), Tajik(30.36%), Uzbeks (17.65%) and Hazaras (6.67%) (Haber et al., 2012)". 10.45% vs 51.02% appears open-and-shut, but look at the end "(Haber et al., 2012)" its from an entirely different source, which classified and tested entirely different ethnic groups (see how Tanoli isn't listed) using entirely different methodology. The percentages are not comparable. The author of the paper does not draw any conclusions about Pashtun-Tanoli relations from this, and we cannot either per WP:SYNTH.

unsurprisingly, since the paper did not study Pashtuns as a separate group, it says nothing about Pashtuns and R1b1a or L-M20.

this is not my area of expertise, i make no assertions of if Pashtuns and Tanoli are related or not, but i do assert that this source[2] is insufficient to make such a claim. my suggestion would be to remove the genetic section outright, it doesnt contribute much once this is corrected and would likely be undue.

unrelated to the above, the article states: "In fact, the non-distinctiveness of the Syeds, relative to the other sampled ethnic groups of northern Pakistan suggests their assertion of descent from the Prophet is not likely to be true.", is this use of genetic information to prove or disprove descent from the Prophet disconcerting to anyone else or just me? edit: self-striking, i do not think this will be constructive fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 07:12, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

First of all Pashtun are ethnic groups which claim that they are basically from sons of Yaqoob the prophet and then they are Pashtun some of them are sons of binhamen and some are son of yousaf,

even every pastun caste have different dna, yousafzae, mohmand, salarzae, bannochi, msrwat, lodhi, tareen have different dna’s

in tanolis the nawab said in every video we are Pashtun and we came from paktia afghanistan,

now your point is also important to cut off genetic whole topic, because we have bookish references about tanolis that they they are ethnicly Pashtun, even yousafzae and tanoli came to hind at same time, they both share thier bouders of states, even we have letter of ahmad shah abdali wrote to our nawab at that time,

now this thing is clear tanolis are hazarawal or Pashtun but not a turk? We are feeling shame to be a turk because in muslims history turkish state usmania and turkey is holy to muslims, but the point is that if our grand fath Is afghan why we change our grandpa?? MAKTHAKT (talk) 08:47, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

• i make no claims about the Tanolis relation to or lack thereof with the Turks.
• i make no claims about the Tanolis relation to or lack thereof with the Pashtun.

::* my only assertion is that this source does not prove, nor claim, that Tanolis and Pashtuns are genetically separate. edit: self-striking as i do not think this will be constructive fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk)

your passion about the Tanolis is admirable, but please try to temper that passion by letting reliable sources guide your edits, or if you are contending that a claim is false then let the policy on verifiability be your guide. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 09:04, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Okay, let's admit that no conclusion was drawn in this report. Then how did it come to be assumed that Tanolis are Turks? Any embryological evidence? Any documentary evidence? Nothing, just hypocrisy. MAKTHAKT (talk) 08:56, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Clarification on Tanoli Ethnic Identity and Verifiability Standards

@MAKTHAKT:

Please refer to Wikipedia’s core content policies — particularly WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:NOR. Your edits rely heavily on anecdotal claims, personal identity, and unverified YouTube videos, none of which meet the threshold of reliable sourcing.

Simply claiming to be a Tanoli does not grant editorial authority. In fact, editing topics with which you have a personal or cultural connection is a clear case of WP:COI. If you have a conflict of interest, best practice is to suggest edits on the Talk page and allow uninvolved editors to review them.

Please also be reminded that Urdu Wikipedia or any Wikipedia article cannot be used as a source for another article per WP:CIRCULAR.

As for the Tanoli tribe's origins, academic sources do not classify them as ethnic Pashtuns. On the contrary:

• Scholars like A.H. Dani describe the Tanolis as descending from Barlas Turks, not Afghans: "A tribe claiming descent from the Barlas Turks who migrated from Central Asia into the subcontinent during the early Mughal period."

• Dr. Adil Najam notes they are Hindko-speaking and culturally distinct from Pashtun tribes: "Despite the presence in Hazara Division, most Tanolis are Hindko-speaking and culturally distinct from Pashtun tribes, with claims to Turkic ancestry."

Additionally, the oft-repeated idea that Pashtuns descend from the "sons of Yaqoob" is a tribal myth, not supported by peer-reviewed scholarship or genetics:

• A peer-reviewed article in 'Human Biology (2001) states: "The hypothesis of Jewish ancestry among Pathans was not supported by the data."

Lastly, removing sourced content because it is deemed "embarrassing" violates WP:NOTCENSORED.

Please stop engaging in WP:EDITWAR, and ensure that any future contributions are supported by independent, verifiable, and scholarly sources.

Thank you.

McKhan ^(talk) 20:14, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

The DNA report of Hazara University has not been accepted by every nation as wrong and wrong. I will soon add new DNA of Swabi. Due to living in Tanoli, problems arise in DNA due to the people who are called Tanoli themselves. MAKTHAKT (talk) 05:39, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

Your two historians are calling Tanoli Turks, so what about the other thousands of historians who are writing Tanoli as Pashtun? Did you leave out these millions for some reason - like the Afghan Tanoli book is written above Tanoli Pashtun?

What is the relationship between Ahmad Shah Abdali and Khan Zabar Khan Tanoli? Amanullah Khan Hotak has written Tanoli and Tanokhel as Pashtuns in his book Azadi Ki Subh? In Tarikh Khurshid Jahan, Tanoli is written as Pashtun? In Tarikh Gadoon Jadoon Book, Tanoli is written as Pashtun? Then in the family tree of the Ghilzai tribes, Tanoli is written as Pashtun.The famous historian of Afghanistan, Hidayat Bettani, has included the Tanoli among the Pashtun tribes and even today the Tanoli are present in Afghanistan, Pakistan and India, like the Yousafzai tribe. But if they were of Turkish origin, then a branch of them would be present in Turkey, while the people of their tribe are still present in Paktia, Afghanistan.

And in many famous historical traditions, the story of Tanoli is found as a Pashtun. Then come the Turks and Pashtuns of the Panipat battle in which Ghazi Painda Khan Tanoli and Jadoon and Yousafzai together waged jihad against the Sikhs? Then it was the Tanoli who drove the Turks out of Hazara by firing.Your hypocrisy is only that two fu*king have called Tanoli a Turk and the DNA report of Hazara University, at the end of which this uneducated person did not draw any conclusion? You see your two references, but what about the thousands of references I am putting in?

I will publish Swabi's DNA report soon and then you will see who is doing the same? The rest, thank God, Tanoli is a warrior and Pashtun tribe. Those whose family tree is similar to the Chinese should not talk about the family trees of others. MAKTHAKT (talk) 06:00, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

Response to Claims Regarding Tanoli Identity and Sources

@MAKTHAKT:,

This is not a personal matter, and I respectfully ask that personal attacks or inflammatory language be avoided per WP:CIVIL. I am not the creator of the Tanoli article, nor do I have any personal connection to the Tanolis. Like all other editors, I am simply trying to help maintain Wikipedia’s standards of accuracy, neutrality, and verifiability.

I find it noteworthy that your account appeared shortly after User:Farazkhantanoli782 was blocked, and that many of the same arguments, language, and edits are now being repeated again — despite years of discussion and consensus-building on this article. This pattern of repeated attempts to alter the Tanoli article using different usernames, IPs, or newly created accounts has been observed before. While I won’t speculate on account coordination here, I strongly encourage you to thoroughly review Talk:Tanoli/Archive_1, where these claims have been addressed and ultimately rejected by multiple neutral editors due to lack of WP:RS-compliant sources. Wikipedia does not allow arguments to be reintroduced endlessly unless new, verifiable evidence is provided — see WP:DISRUPT and WP:REHASH.

I have even previously requested extended page protection, but unfortunately that request was declined. However, the history of disruptive editing attempts remains well documented.

You have stated openly that you are a Tanoli yourself, and while personal heritage is valid in cultural discussions, it creates a clear WP:COI (conflict of interest) when editing an article about one’s own ethnic background. Wikipedia content is not determined by personal identity, oral tradition, or ethnic pride — only by WP:RS and WP:V standards.

You have also claimed there are "millions" of historians who classify the Tanolis as Pashtun, but as per WP:BURDEN, the responsibility is on you to provide verifiable, *independent* and *published* scholarly sources. So far, no such academic or peer-reviewed material has been produced that substantiates this claim. Assertions from political figures, nationalistic works, or self-published material are insufficient per WP:RS.

This is an exaggeration and lacks basis in verifiable fact. There are not even “thousands” of scholarly works written by "Pashtun historians" on *major Pashtun tribes* such as the Yousafzai, Afridi, Khattak, Mohmand, Wazir, or Orakzai — how is it then plausible that a supposed body of Pashtun historiography exists regarding a smaller, ethnically ambiguous group like the Tanolis?

Additionally, both myself and others (including independent reviewers and researchers) have searched extensively and found no scholarly consensus or body of academic work — in English or Urdu — that supports the claim that Tanolis are Pashtuns. Instead, the available material reveals only conflicting narratives and ethnonationalist attempts to link Tanolis to the Ghilzai confederation via Tanokhel/Tanai — none of which are based on peer-reviewed or historically verifiable sources.

Furthermore, the idea that living in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa or speaking Pashto makes someone a Pashtun is incorrect. If that were the case, then numerous Hindko-speaking communities like the Gujjars, Kakakhels, and Syeds — many of whom speak fluent Pashto — would also qualify as Pashtuns, which is not ethnographically supported.

Your attempt to connect the Tanolis to the Tanokhel/Tanai sub-tribe of the Ghilzai Pashtuns is factually flawed. Tanokhel/Tanai are an Afghan Pashtun tribe, primarily located in Khost, Afghanistan, and form a sub-branch of the Ghilzai confederation. Tanolis, on the other hand, have a well-documented presence in Hazara (Tanawal) and are linguistically, culturally, and historically distinct. They speak Hindko, not Pashto, and are identified in various records as Hindkowan or Turkic in origin.

In fact, historical records show that the **Tanolis were already settled in Tanawal** before the arrival of the Yousafzai Pashtuns. The Yousafzai displaced tribes such as the Dilazak and others as they migrated from Afghanistan — but they could not have displaced the Tanolis unless the Tanolis were already present in the region. This alone undermines the hypothesis that the Tanolis are recent Afghan migrants connected to Tanokhel.

Additionally, you’ve referenced claims about a “Dara Tanol” in Afghanistan as the origin of the Tanolis. However, this appears to be a myth without scholarly backing. As per this research-based Facebook post, by one of your fellow Tanoli, which directly examines original historical texts:

"A number of recent Tanoli authors have falsely claimed that Akhund Darveza mentioned the migration of Tanolis from Dara Tanol in his book *Tazkara Abrar Wal Ashrar*. However, there is no such reference in that book. In fact, Akhund Darveza stated that the Tanolis were already firmly established in Tanawal in the 1450s, and were first defeated only in the 1590s by Yousafzai Sardar Ali Asghar. Even powerful figures like Malik Ahmed and Gajju Khan failed to conquer Tanawal prior to that. Moreover, a letter from Mughal Emperor Muhammad Shah to Subah Khan refers to Tanolis as residents of Tanawal from 'zamana qadeem' (ancient times)."

This evidence completely debunks the idea of a Ghilzai (Tanokhel) origin. It also demonstrates that Tanolis have a long-standing connection to Tanawal that precedes the arrival of Pashtun tribes in the region.

Your references to DNA also fall outside Wikipedia's WP:RS standards. A claim that you will “publish” a DNA report from Swabi is irrelevant unless it appears in a peer-reviewed, reliable journal. Wikipedia does not accept unpublished data or personal research per WP:OR.

Please also avoid further WP:EDITWAR. Disruptive editing based on personal belief, national sentiment, or ancestral loyalty violates WP:NPOV, WP:CONSENSUS, and WP:DISRUPT. If it continues, formal administrative action may be necessary.

Finally, I want to stress that there is no reward — or shame — in being labeled Pashtun, Turkic, Hindkowan, or otherwise. Every heritage has its own dignity and beauty. But Wikipedia is not a platform to validate identity narratives — it is a platform to document what can be verified per WP:V, WP:RS, WP:NOR, and WP:NPOV.

Let us all take pride in our own histories, but refrain from revising them to suit personal identity or political motivations. If Tanolis are proud warriors — and surely many of them are — that fact does not make them Pashtun by ethnicity. We must focus on what reliable, independent, academic sources actually say — not what we wish to believe.

Please refrain from WP:EDITWAR, and continue this conversation constructively on the Talk page. If reliable sources emerge, they will be reviewed in good faith.

Regards,

cc: @Callanecc:, @Jimfbleak:

McKhan ^(talk) 15:48, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

Jadoon Visit this article and you will see that they are described as Pashtun but the Genetic report is showing O3 dominant which are not characteristic like Pashtuns.

Page 177 They have very low numbers of R1a1 but Tanoli having R1a1 in most of his population but R1b2 as a dominant.

So from that dna report they made conclusion they are pashtun and tanoli aren’t which is totally based on hypocrisy. so in some others tribes having R1a1 . Like Gujjar Syed Syed claims they are descended from Prophet Muhammad.

I believe that this a imaginary myth that pashtuns are from son of Prophet Ibrahim or Yousaf. They have Asian genes but having some other haplogroup like O3 and R1b2. I’m Sharing also Dna report Link

[[3]]

Here R1b2 doesn’t take Tanolis to Barlas Turk.

so if we have a conclusion on bookish reference about Jadoon so why not we have these conclusions about Tanoli .

@McKhan @Fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four

@Warriorglance

@Pppery (alt)

@Pppery@EighteenFiftyNine@Jimfbleak MAKTHAKT (talk) 08:04, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Enough

I've blocked MAKTHAKT for edit warring and warned that I'll remove talk page access if the personal attacks don't stop Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:35, 23 April 2025 (UTC)