Talk:Kayqubad III

Name

The laqab, or honorific, Alâeddin or 'Alā al-Din, "Excellence of Religion," is helpful to know, but not strictly important for identifying this ruler. Such laqabs are used throughout the period and the title 'Alā al-Din is assigned to several notable figures in the Seljuq line and other contemporaries outside the dynasty.

The spelling "Kayqubad" is prominent in the numismatic literature and is a more transparent transliteration of the Arabic and Persian. Aramgar 15:21, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Move request

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus to move the page from Kayqubad III to Alaeddin Keykubad III, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 13:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

---

• Please see the disambiguation page Alaeddin Keykubad for the three homonymous Seljuk Sultan of Rûm of the 13th century. Explained in detail in the body of that page the various forms of the name used in different sources with direct links in the footnotes. There has been some discussion over this (see talk page) but it remains that Alaeddin Keykubad III is the correct form. There are further explanations along with the table comprising the names of all sultans. I would like to see that this is uncontested and then I will make move requests for other sultans as well, also providing indication of the use in sources.— Cretanforever 11:51, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't agree. Cahen's The Formation of Turkey uses "Kay Qubādh [numeral], [epithet]" in the index. The Cambridge History of Iran seems to use Kai-Qubād. The Origins of the Ottoman Empire indexes him as 'Alā' al-Dīn Kai-Qubād and generally as [epithet] [name]. If you wanted short, unambiguous, and no diacritics, Kayqubad would be a reasonable choice. So, no, I'm not in favour of moving to the names proposed, and if they were to be moved to long names I'd want different ones. Angus McLellan (Talk) 19:14, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

In addition to the sources mentioned by Angusmclellan, I would add that the numismatic literature identifies him as either “Kayqubad” or “Kayqubadh.” Kayqubad’s laqab is already present in the Persian/Arabic transcription ('Alā al-Dīn Kayqubād) and the Turkish language version (Turkish: III. Alâeddin Keykubad). This name, as well as those of the other sultans, should be left as is. Aramgar 18:08, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Move request 2

We don't need to have the same move discussion on three different pages. Usually this type of discussion is centralized as a multimove. Anyway, please continue disucssion at Talk:Kayqubad I rather than here. Dekimasuよ! 02:48, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kayqubad III. 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://web.archive.org/web/20080801083656/http://mehmeteti.150m.com/seljuqsofrum/UE1247.htm to http://mehmeteti.150m.com/seljuqsofrum/UE1247.htm

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 13:13, 3 May 2017 (UTC)