CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Bogʻdon

human settlement in Uzbekistan

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionAug 13, 2026
Entity authorityQ4537935 ↗
Source-derived summary

Bogʻdon (Uzbek: Bogʻdon/Боғдон, before 2014 Yangiqishloq, Russian: Янгикишлак, romanized: Yangikishlak) is an urban-type settlement in Jizzakh Region, Uzbekistan, and is the administrative center of Forish District. The town population in 1989 was 6,611 people.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Bogʻdon” as human settlement in Uzbekistan. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA concise reference frame for defining the subject, testing terminology and identifying the institution closest to the evidence. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2014, 1989—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Bogʻdon, human and settlement can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as human settlement in Uzbekistan. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 13, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q4537935. Authority coordinates are 40.419, 67.179. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2014 and 1989.

Critical limits

The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Bogʻdon”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Bogʻdon primary sources, Bogʻdon archive and Bogʻdon research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Bogʻdon”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Bogʻdon” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.