Talk:Malik

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Malik 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

India: Punjab Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Punjab portal This article is supported by WikiProject Punjab (India) (assessed as Mid-importance).

Assyria Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Assyria, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Assyrian-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.AssyriaWikipedia:WikiProject AssyriaTemplate:WikiProject AssyriaAssyrian articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ancient Near East Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ancient Near East related articles 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.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Royalty and Nobility

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility.

Linguistics Low‑importance

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics 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.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Miscellaneous

The reference to yugioh really adds clarity to the whole article, keep up the good work Wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.208.202.214 (talk) 00:35, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Malik is Last name of Nadeem

Nadeem Malik Born in Karachi, Pakistan April 1970 Imigraded to Ontario, Canada in 1990

is this the entry for Malik {king} or Maalik {owner}?

I've seen some literature that mentions that the gaurdian of hellfire is named "Maalik" but it's not mentioned in the Quran HussaynKhariq 19:48, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I've added the information and references on the angel Malik within The Dictionary of Angels: Including the Fallen Ones by Gustav Davidson. Jordan Yang 16:53, 10 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Whooo thank you so much everyone that has helped on this article, My Arabic name is Malik because im 1/4 sudanise and I never knew anything about it asin how to write it in arabic and the meaning =D

Good catch

Thanks Hussayn,

I was trying to verify the two paras you deleted...somebody's ugly graffito

Arabic form: الملك or ملك

I may easily be mistaken, but shouldn't the Arabic form given in parentheses be simply "ملك", without the definite article (-ال)? When so prefixed, as the article itself indicates, it refers exclusively to God ("the King"), not the more general, "human" concept. Or at least that's my understanding. Keldan 09:13, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oriental Languages ?

The description of Malik states:

Malik is a word that means "king" in Arabic, also adopted in various other oriental languages, also in derived meanings.

It should be clarified. Any suggestions ?

Siddiqui 14:29, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Additional meaning

I just wanted to mention that "Malik" also has a meaning in greenlandic. It means "wave" (in liquid, normally in the sea) and it can also be used as a name (it's acctually my name:O)

Malik, 10 Maj 2006

Malik is also a popular surname in Slovakia. It is my maiden name. The pronunciation has been Americanized from "Mah-lek" to MAL-ik. In the 1960-1980s though it was leaning towards turning into MAY-lik. Thankfully that seems to have stopped. Now most Maliks are known as "Mah-LEEK" instead. Which is interesting if you're blonde and blue-eyed like myself.

adoption of a name

i hate how people change their last name to malik it makes my family history research harder to find

Merge Melik?

I suggest to merge this article with Melik, as it is about the same title. In Caucasus it belonged to minor feudals, both Muslim and Christian. Grandmaster 14:53, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like a good idea to me. — Malik Shabazz | Talk 00:19, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support, provided the small page Melik is merged into the larger Malik Arcarius 05:54, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I suggest to merge that article into this one. Grandmaster 05:38, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Melik may be merged into Malik, not the other way

Melik may be merged with Malik, finally leaving only Malik. The Russian usage of Melik may also be accomodated with Malik -- Altruism^{To talk} 10:02, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's what I propose. Grandmaster 10:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why Melik should not be merged with Malik

These are two very different topics, other than the etymology of Melik, there are no other connections, none whatsoever with Malik. Melik is a very expandable topic, moreso than Malik. Look at the following results returned from Google Books: [1]. Melik with an "e" refers to the Turkish and other Turkic usage of the name for a person, meaning "king" or "ruler"; it can also refer to the Armenian Meliks in history on google books and academic peer reviewed works which has a completely different meaning than Malik with an "a."-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 18:47, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please explain how Melik — "prince" — "has a completely different meaning" than Malik — "king." I've seen the discussion at Talk:Melik, but I can't read a significant portion of the explanation because I don't understand the language it's written in.

It seems to me, as a non-Arab and a non-Armenian whose only interest here is merging articles if doing so is appropriate, that Melik is a derivative of Malik (as Melik says), and the title developed in the Armenian context differently than the concept of Malik did elsewhere. If that's the case, I don't understand why the two articles couldn't be merged. Malik already describes the use of Malik for kings, tribal leaders (in Pakistan), chiefs (in Persia), aristocrats (in the Punjab), heads of prominent households (in Georgia), and military leaders (as well as its use as "Melik" in Armenia and colonial India) — all examples of how the concept of Malik developed differently in different contexts. It seems to me that the Armenian Malek is just another example, not a unique case, but maybe you can explain why I'm wrong. — Malik Shabazz | Talk 20:07, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First off you don't have to tell me why you're participating here, that doesn't matter. I must thank Grandmaster again for spreading the conflict in other unrelated pages. Dear Malik, the reason why I created the article Melik was because I have found books about the Armenian Meliks and under such circumstances I qualified the subject very expendable. If you think that a better title should be used like Armenian Meliks instead of Melik I don't mind changing it, even though ALL google book hits for “Melik” return results related to the Armenian Meliks and not some other nonexistant and elusive muslim meliks, and after finding those results I have concluded that the article was even more expandable. There are no particular policies or guidelines in regards to merging of an article, so this should solely be based on the expendability potential of the article. I think I have demonstrated that it can be expanded greatly thus it should not be merged to an article based on the etymology of the title. I also believe it's a unique case for many reasons, which can come to light if the article is given the chance to be expanded.-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 16:17, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Malik or Melik was a title of a minor feudal lord in the Caucasus, and not only for Armenians. Muslims also had that title. I provided more than enough sources on that. It is the same word of Arabic origin that was used in different parts of Muslim world. Grandmaster 05:05, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No it was not and you have done nothing of the sort since that's impossible.-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 16:17, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If there are "many reasons" why Melik is a unique case, please identify some of them. I'm not pushing for a merger, I'm just trying to understand why you feel so strongly that they shouldn't be merged. The fact that Melik can be expanded may be a good reason, so I would appreciate if you could elaborate on it.

For the record, here's what WP:MERGE, which isn't a policy or a guideline, says:

There are several good reasons to merge a page:

- There are two or more pages on exactly the same subject.

- There are two or more pages on related subjects that have a large overlap. Wikipedia is not a dictionary; there does not need to be a separate entry for every concept in the universe. For example, "Flammable" and "Non-flammable" can both be explained in an article on Flammability.

- If a page is very short and cannot or should not be expanded terribly much, it often makes sense to merge it with a page on a broader topic.

- If a short article requires the background material or context from a broader article in order for readers to understand it.

Obviously the two articles are not about the same exact subject, but some editors think they're related subjects that overlap. If there's a lot that can be said about Meliks to expand that article, as you suggest there is, that would certainly argue against merging the two, which is why I'd like you to elaborate a little. Thanks. — Malik Shabazz | Talk 17:16, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, but how about I spend the time on expanding the article instead of elaborating here? That should do it given the abundance of sources from google books alone. I'll work on it this evening.-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 17:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. — Malik Shabazz | Talk 22:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eupator, if you check the sources I provided on talk of Melik, you’ll see that the title was used not only by Armenians, but by Muslims as well. There were meliks of Bargushad and Aresh, for example, in the territory of present day Azerbaijan republic. Grandmaster 05:34, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mamluk

Is the name of the Mamluk related? --84.20.17.84 14:34, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

they share the same root. both are from the root m-l-k, which indicates owning. A malik is called so because (in concept) he owns the land, while mamluk literally means "one that is onwned" i.e., a slave. The mamluks are called so because they where originally slaves. --Maha Odeh 12:34, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jews in Arabic articles

I would like to request all Jews to stop adding non related information on this Malik article as well. This Malik article is based on Arabic and Mughal point of view in Malik.

This article is based on Arabic meaning of Malik. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.237.253.131 (talk) 18:51, January 10, 2008

This is an article about a word. It's appropriate to mention other words that are related to the subject word, including Persian and Hebrew. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 00:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The IP address is clearly expressing a bias that interferes with their ability to be objective, evidenced by the assumption that editors who restore the deleted material are "Jews." Pairadox (talk) 00:20, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tawûsê Melek

The Yazidi name for God's primary form, Tawûsê Melek, is not related to the word malik "king", but is rather a borrowing from another, similar-appearing but totally unrelated Arabic word, malak "messenger, angel". The Aramaic and Hebrew cognates are both mal'akh; the hamza was lost in Meccan Arabic and therefore the terms appear similar. However, it is a coincidence. He is the Peacock Angel, not "King Peacock". ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 20:23, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shanti bhai deletes one out of the only two verifiable content with citations on this article

On 17th Feb: I added the reference section to this article where there was none .

On 22nd January: I added the only verifiable content with citations on this article .

On 6 August user Shanti bhai deletes the verifiable content I provided .
Note it is still only one of the two verifiable contents in the entire article . He comments while deleting cited content
Have replaced sentence, tidy up (if one tribe is mentioned, then all should be mentioned which would use up too much space for a singular point.

If this were not strange enough
On 18th August: user Apostolos Margaritis reintroduces a spurious content and citation into the article , from the Multan Gazetteer of 1923 which provides page 139(Page 139 of this book does not mention Pakistan or this quote) and says In Pakistan this surname is also used by wealthy landowners owners
But Pakistan did not exist in 1923 .

Till 24th August Shanti bhai has no problem with a bogus citation .

Shanti bhai is introducing selective citation requests on scores of articles and deleting citations from other wikipedia articles .
Why ??
Shanti bhai also seems to be using various sock puppets .
Cheers
Intothefire (talk) 17:52, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Malik

In Inuit "Eksimo" Greenlandic, the word Malik means following: 1) Wave, the Wave 2) It also is used as a name, Though the meaning is still the same as 1) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.83.0.228 (talk) 16:28, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation?

Maalik or marlik? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.164.147.213 (talk) 22:19, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mention is made of Maluku islands as possibly relevant in the article...

Would it be appropriate to also mention Meluhha, Malay, Mel and Latin mal?Rich (talk) 11:38, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

no, because these words are completely unrelated. --dab (𒁳) 12:49, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of cited content for unassigned reasons

Hi Dbachmann
Please inform why you deleted a valid referenced quotations from a verifiable source , specially since you are an admin , and this content was directly related to this article and that it has been repeatedly vandle deleted by others as well . I would have expected that as an admin you would protect referenced content and not delete for unassigned reasons . By Dbachmann on 8th September2010

It is also used by Kukhran Khatris of India and Pakistan

“

where there are Khatri families in Multan which are addressed as Malik or Raiszada. [Gazetteer of the Multan District 1923-24 published by Sang-E-Meel Publications and Page 139]

”

“

Among Muhammadans the term Malik is applied to the chief men among the Khokhars, Vainses and some other clans

”

Intothefire (talk) 11:53, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you explain what a verbatim quote from the "Gazetteer of the Multan District 1923-24" is doing in the "Malik" article? The article is aware that Malik means "tribal chieftain" in South Asia. It is unclear why we should want to name random tribes which have chieftains. See WP:DUE. --dab (𒁳) 14:37, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The referenced content was added by me on on 22 January 2008 when the immediate preceding sentence stated The term Malik is used in Afghanistan and the tribal areas of Pakistan, especially among Pashtuns, for a tribal leader or a chieftain. Therefore the content added was corelated and germane .The tribes mentioned are SouthAsian and the article is about cheftians .Where is the question of WP:DUE .Further considering the the version of the page then WP:DUE was not applicable then either because of the associated content .Its another matter that the content I added then was the only referenced content at the time .
Now going back to my query to you regarding your deletion , In view of the above ,I would appreciate to know why you see only this information as random WP:DUE ,in the surfeit of diverse content on the page version when you deleted this but left the rest . I fail to see the evenhanded rational of WP:DUE demonstrated then Intothefire (talk) 17:45, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

this is an article about an Arabic term for "king". There are other articles you may be interested in:

--dab (𒁳) 12:54, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Arabic term came to be adopted as a term for "tribal chieftain" in in Afghanistan and the tribal areas of Pakistan, especially among Pashtuns, for a tribal leader or a chieftain. Maliks serve as de facto arbiters in local conflicts, interlocutors in state policy-making, tax-collectors, heads of village and town councils and delegates to provincial and national jirgas as well as to Parliament.

Among Tanoli Term Malik is applied to the chief of villages or notable personalities Nawab Khalli Maliks are the sons of Rais e Azam Nawab Khan. Malik is used by Khokhars and Khokhran, and refers to chiefs, In the Punjab, "Malik" was one of the titles used by local aristocrats, more formally known as Zamindars, under both the Mughals and the British, and to some degree still in present-day Pakistan. The title is given for large amount of ownership of land(landlords).

Like many prestigious titles, Malik or Malek is a common element in first and family names, usually without any aristocratic meaning. For example, Awan Malik is a large community in Pakistan with Arab heritage. Malik is used both as title and surname in Pakistan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muhammed Waqas Malik Awan (talk • contribs) 21:49, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unintelligible sentence in lead

As per common sense I have removed the following sentence, which would appear to make no sense at all:

Just like Shah and Pahlavi titles used in India as well as Iran; the Malik titles signify common Indo-Iranian languages in India and Iran.

What is meant here? I don't have a clue, and I welcome any improvement.

Accusativen hos Olsson (talk) 20:57, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MALIK

my name Ghulam Yasin

S/O

Karim Bux BYE CATE MALIK KARIM BUX S/O ALLAH JEWAYO(PAHLWAN KHAN) S/O GHULAM HYHER S/O MUHAMMAD YOUSIF IN VILAGE DISTT:KASHMORE@KANDH KOT HAMMID KHAN MALIK(THORE BAND) AND GHARHE TEGHO DISTT:SHEIKARPUR. OMLY ME I AM DISTT PRESIDENT AWAMI NATIONAL PARTY(ANP) KASHMORE AND SELECET ME ANP SINDH IN ELECTION2013. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.160.119.226 (talk) 16:41, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Malik

Malik is one of the largest clan of jat. Malik is found in all religions hindu Muslim sikh. They are landlord and landowner. 223.189.18.17 (talk) 19:34, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And your WP:Reliable sources for those claims are? - Arjayay (talk) 19:59, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Previous revision (2004)

Revision as of 21:06, 1 March 2004 mentioning this term comes from Arabic rather than the use of similar terms from Semitic languages 116.206.33.58 (talk) 12:45, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]