Talk:Pashtuns/Archive 8

message: There are 2 Pashtun articles. Pashtuns and Pashtun people
I don't know how this happened, but this needs to be fixed immediatly or it will cause major problems! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Behnam) 07:10, 22 October 2006.
:Thanks, I've fixed it now. —Khoikhoi 18:18, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you very much. But, Sorry for asking, but just to be sure, did you add the changes from the Pashtuns article to the Pashtun people article. Because I remember a few people made some changes to the Pashtuns article. --Behnam 17:30, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The only changes were this (which was also made here), this, and this (which was also made here as well). Khoikhoi 03:55, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Great! Nice work. Thank you. Issue solved. Behnam 07:22, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ATTENTION!!! There are 2 Pashtun articles. [[Pashtuns]] and [[Pashtun people]] 

message: Whenever an image is replaced/removed, please place it here in case it is needed again in the future. Also, we should always have a section open for this. So when this is archived, please make a new section for this purpose. Thank you.
Image:At a wedding tif.jpg
Image:Ahmad Shah Durrani.jpg|Ahmad Shah Durrani
Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg
Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg
Image:Mirwais Ahmadzai.jpg|Mirwais Ahmadzai
Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg|Dillip Kumar
Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg
Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg|Fardeen Khan
Image:Jansher1.gif
Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg|Shah Rukh Khan
Image:Afghanistan-Pakistan border.JPG
Image:Ahmed Shah Durrani.jpg|Ahmad Shah Durrani
Image:Pasht rug.jpg|Pashtun vendor displaying a silk rug from Afghanistan
Behnam 05:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''IMPORTANT NOTICE''': Please place removed/replaced images here. 

message: I founded New Yorkers for Fair Use, NYLXS and work with people in the FSF and I believe that under current law, that photo from National Geographic is not going to make an effective fair use argument under US Law.
Why not just ask them for a donation :)
Ruben Safir
:I have done just that. The photographer's manager wants to talk about it, so I'll keep everyone posted as to the results. Tombseye 22:54, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Highly Questionable Fair Use of National Geographic Photograph

message: I keep fixing it and someone adds another tribe or two and leaves it a mess. I suggest that we list only major tribes and create a new article to list the many other tribes as a whole in order to avoid making this article look so sloppy. I want to improve this article with the hopes that it will be considered a good article and perhaps a featured article. The main tribes I believe would be, due to their large numbers and references in various books: Durrani, Ghilzai, Wazir, Mahsud, Khattak, Bangash, Afridi, Mohmand, Yusufzai, Orakzai, Kakar, and Shinwari. The rest can be seen in both the category and an article on Pashtun tribes since the section is such a mess and needs to be maintained for presentability. Tombseye 22:21, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Tomseye!! You have been keep making mistakes since I am here with wikipedia, even couldn't say a word of Pashto and trying to imposed your academic views on us(Pashtuns). Now a very important thing which I would like to mention here for your changing in Tribes list like by saying MAIN PASHTUNS TRIBES or larger pashtun tribes and smaller pashtun tribes, this is exectly what Britishers did in the past much important tribes,  lesser known tribes and rewarding them by pure, doubtful, brave, cowards, and decietful, they had already tried to make clear distinctions among pashtuns for their own targets goals etc, they had adopted divide and rule policy and they were succeeded aswell but today's Pashtun will not tolerate any discrimination amongst them as you have done as by showing some of the Pashtun tribes in "Main Pashtuns Tribes" and the rest of pashtun tribes gone into the Pashtun tribes catogary list !!!! Who do you want to make one happy here? The Pashtuns of those tribes glowing on as the main pashtun tribes or should I take it as your another weapon to achieve your task and most probably that would be to make it controversial? There is no need to show any tribe as Main Pashtun tribes - All the Tribes should have been seen in the Pashtun tribes list, dosn't matter if all of them are in Pashtun tribes catagory. Now I won't take any single minuite to delete your this idea to see Pashtuns vs Pashtuns. I hope you would understand my point!     Haider 19:35, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I will when I get the chance. Hopefully, people will get the idea and not keep adding tribes since the list is not there anymore. I already created a new article for the tribe list as well so that should be okay. Tombseye 21:51, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I suggest you change your tone of voice. Your comments include personal attacks and will not be tolerated next time you do it. —Khoikhoi 20:04, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Here: Not even a single Pashtun would like your this discriminative idea so don't go for it again, it's repulsive. How is that not a personal attack? Haider, please assume good faith here. I've worked with Tombseye for quite some time now, and I can definately tell you that his goal at Wikipedia is not to "destroy the Pashtuns". Can we try to be civil here? —Khoikhoi 21:50, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

text: You need to learn that no one hates Pashtuns here. You're not assuming good faith by thinking that when someone only wants the main tribes listed, it's automatically "Pashtun discrimination". Your inability to address people's points in a mature manner is making things very difficult. —Khoikhoi 23:32, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

text: No offense was meant when I decided to fix that section as it was a mess in terms of appearance. The Main tribes referred to the largest tribes. Surely you don't dispute that those tribes I listed are by far the largest? That's all I meant by it. Also, you perhaps don't understand that a sloppy article has no hope of being a good article or a featured article and the long list of tribes was both disjointed and largely unverifiable (many had not articles and were simply obscure tribes, which is not meant to offend, but to the reader would be meaningless except as a name. As for not knowing a word of Pashto, well I did learn a few words and sentences and tried to communicate using what little I could through some books I took with me when I was in Peshawar just to show my respect towards the local people as I am far from anti-Pashtun. I am considering studying Pashto in school so we'll see how that goes. You may note that I'm the guy who wrote most of this article and without malice or ill-intent I might add. Manana and khuda paman. Tombseye 18:30, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Okay, I understand what you are saying and I would like to say that I meant no offense as I like the Pashtun people which is why I contributed to this article. Hopefully, in its current form with the Pashtun tribes given their own article we cannot offend anyone. Nor do I seek to divide anyone, as my intent is to write a good article that has a chance to be a featured article so that more people can learn about the fascinating Pashtuns. Wabakshah. Har shay sam barabar di? Tombseye 23:36, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Tribal section is a mess

message: Hey guys, just wanted to give you some feedback, I really like the article I've learned alot about my people that I didn't know before, and I agree with the above comment that the tribal section is really sloppy. another thing that you guys can incorporate into the article is the Durand line issue, but don't know if that would be too controversial. anyways, keep up the good work =)
Teardrops
: Haider is back ! I was absent due to sphere some time as volunteer in earthquake affected areas like Batagram and Mansehra etc. Great job SYNC will join you soon in so called iranic thrusty debate on Pashtuns page!  203.170.71.56 20:58, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We do talk about the Durand Line and it's mentioned twice in the article, but the article is already too long and in order for it to be considered a good or hopefully after some more editing a featured article it needs to be made more presentable. I don't think it's controversial myself, but then a lot of things become controversial if just one or two people get upset. Tombseye 21:53, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Some feedback

message: A jirga of a Political party ANP held in Karachi dated 14th of April, Pashtun politicians and elders also took part in it and claimed that the Pashtun people in Sindh are about three million and majority of them dwell in the cosmopolitan city of Karachi. We must take it as authentic information till new official counting set in. Pashtun population in Sindh/Karachi should have been rectified now on main pashtun page !   Haider 16th of may 2006.
::This is such a strange thing here, Wikipedia was made so anyone can add and change info but whenever we add or change anything in here, it is reverted back by a few guys (one or two) so that only they can change and noone else can. That undermines the point of Wikipedia and the authencity of it. Upto the point, that a person has to suggest to that guy so he can make the change as others can't, making it his decision as the what he thinks is right or wrong. Infact, it it against the Wiki culture.
:We really need something more specific. There is already a census of Karachi that shows the number of Pashtuns there and if there are 3 million in the province, okay, but again we need something more than some guy saying that's the figure. Demographics tend to reflect official stats and not what some guy, politician or not, says. Otherwise, if we went by what George Bush said, we'd be living in fantasy-land (which many Americans are if they actually believe what he says). Tombseye 12:17, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pashtun population in Sindh 

message: :Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
*Support I support it since it is a main category and the article is about Pathans and term Pashtuns only means Pashtu speaking people. Confirmed from Dict. too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AliKhan007 (talk • contribs) 
*Strongly Oppose There is no such thing as Pathans. Pathan only matters in the books of the British where the word was used for Pashto speaking Pashtuns and they picked it up from the Bharatis who called the Pashto speakers Pashtun/Pakhtuns Pathans that fought the Sikhs, Rajputs, Maharatas, Mughuls etc. Pathan term was later popularized by the Muslims in Bollywood who wanted nothing to do with the Hindu/Hindustani origin and hence claimed to be Pathans. Sync2k5 23:00, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Note to closing administrator: The two above statements are from brand-new users. Kafziel 18:55, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh, give me a break. This is ridiculous. Kafziel 19:55, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

text: You have never editing anything before, much less had your edit reverted.  Kafziel 20:07, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't worry, the new users will be ignored by the administrator who closes the discussion. Kafziel 20:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

text: excuse me? what Pathans of India? Was this about some Indian talk or about Pathans Utaker 20:54, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Pathans is an Indian term and is not at all accurate when it comes to referring to the Pashtuns. Pashtun is now the most common usage as Pathan is archaic and generally applied increasingly to people who claim Pashtun descent in India or it is used (incorrectly) to denote all the people of Afghanistan. Tombseye 20:57, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There have been mixed views about it, some saying your statement and some saying against it. Anyway, this discussion seems neverending. What matters is our current deeds and the world we make out of our lives. Utaker 21:56, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oppose the debate is pointless Pashtuns are the original ethnic group...for the purpose of space I'd recommend a separate article within a pashtun category on Pathans which covers the various pathan groups where they settled and how they settled. --Zak 15:01, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: Since the majority of Pashtuns reside in Pakistan, why aren't there any photos of Pakistani Pathans? You could include one of Imran Khan perhaps.
:Khushal Khan Khattak was born in the Pashtun region of what is today Pakistan actually so he counts. The others are the best known Pashtun figures so the pictures are pretty complete. Tombseye 01:59, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Photos 

message: There is no such thing as PATHAN! Pathan was a denotation given to those who are known as Pashtuns/Pakhtuns. Pathans was a term used by the British for Pashtuns/Pakhtuns. It was popularized by the Bollywood culture later. It has no historical significance other then false desperado macho ego of some Hindustanis who like to boost their non-Indian non-Hindu origins in the face of their countrymen whether in Pakistan or India. 
Baharatis called the Pakhtuns Pathans and Persian/Iranians used the term Afghan. The Pathan term was later used by the British for the Pakhtuns/Pashtuns. There didn’t exist another tribe or nation who didn’t speak Pashto and where Pathans that the British were fighting and writing about. When they were writing and recording the history of Pathans they were in the areas of Pashto speakers, they were at war with Pashto speakers. They were talking about Pashto speaking PATHANS not Pathans of Hindustan. 
Someone give this PATHAN a history book. Sync2k5 22:29, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  To Mr. Pathan 

message: Pathan vs. Pashtun and / or Pashtun / vs. Pathan is a futile discussion and complete wastage of time and energy.
Being a Pathan / Pashtun / Pakhtun is all about belonging to an ethnicity NOT a liguistic race. It has nothing to do with the language. 
Only ignorants and insecured ones claim that Pashto is the only language spoken by the Pathans / Pashtuns / Pakhtuns.
It is disservice to the history of Pathans / Pashtuns / Pakhtuns and tantamount to "divide and rule" strategy, the very same strategy which Pathans / Pashtuns / Pakhtuns accuse the others of - as well as - categorically UN-ISLAMIC.
Moreoever, Didn't Pathans / Pakhtuns / Pashtuns notice that how many times the other parties have tried to tweak the demographics / statistics of Pathans / Pashtuns / Pakhtuns, incorporate Pro-Iranian excerpts or references .etc on this very page? Doesn't all these efforts constitute to a wake-up call to all these Pathans / Pakhtuns / Pashtuns who are so passionately fighting over such a minute "issue"?
Those people who are trying to draw these lines on the premises of spellings and / or any language are only playing in the hands of those people who want Pathans / Pashtuns / Pakhtuns to be divided and consequently get weakened.
Pathans / Pashtuns / Pakhtuns need as much as help they can get from their bretherens rather than severing the ties with them. 
It is time for Pathans / Pakhtuns / Pashtuns to wake up and stick together rather than destroying themselves with their own bare hands.
McKhan
:Agreed. and we need to be tolerant as well as not fall into the divide and rule strategy of the opressors. Utaker 12:22, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pathan vs. Pashtun and / or Pashtun / vs. Pathan is a futile and counter-productive discussion 

message: And there is only one other ethnic groups featured article, Tamil people, so that's pretty cool. I just want to thank all the folks who helped me make this article a featured article: Khoikhoi, Zak, Deeptrivia, Nichal, Sundar and lots of other folks who have come in and fixed up the page and gave their valuable input! Tombseye 17:25, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh and special mention to Haider, whose concerns and critiques were also taken into consideration to improve this article! Tombseye 22:58, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Such as? I edited the section with the genetic study as your criticism was valid there. What else? Please raise the questions here first. The article was voted on through a concensus of a lot of people. Tombseye 16:14, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pashtuns is a Featured Article now!

message: look this site: http://www.pan-iranism.com
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.112.150.72 (talk • contribs) 
::Pan-Iranism is an ideology. Theoretically Pashtuns speak an Iranian language and counted as Iranian peoples but because of centuries of conflicts between Tajiks and Pashtuns, many disregard Pashtuns as Iranian peoples as they do not identify themselves as Iranian peoples (culturally and genetically). --K a s h  Talk | email 18:42, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Pan-Iranists wish. Historically, religiously, and culturaly Pashtuns oppose anything thats "Iranian" or "Persian". Just read the recent news about Afghanistan. Most of the rebellion is coming from Pashtun parts, one due to Taliban factor, second Persians/Iranians in Kabul. And we don't consider ourselves "Iranian" even if means "Aryanians" from which the term "Iran" is derived from. "Iranian" classification is a Western perversion of the original term. Persians don't consider themselves Iranians also. Sync2k5 04:56, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, many Pan-Iranists don't wish. Because of many attempts of GENOCIDE by the Pashtuns on Tajiks. --K a s h  Talk | email 09:50, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Are Pashtuns a Part of Pan-Iranism????

message: I never heard this term before and I hope it isn't here on Wikipedia because of a single article. Pashto films produced in Pakistan are made and directed Lahore, aka Lollywood. There is no such thing as Pollywood since there is no production based in Peshawar of any Pashto films. Even Pashto TV channels are serving from Punjab. Please remove this joke. Sync2k5 05:02, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are some links that also discuss Pashto films and films that used to be made in Peshawar were known as Pollywood. Can you prove the term is not a valid one? We can't go by your own original research as we need something more than heresay. Tombseye 05:38, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just because I can't prove it isn't valid, doesn't mean I'm wrong. Since you can't prove that it is valid, and I can't prove that it isn't, it is best that it shouldn't be included in the mumbo jumbo on Pashtuns in Wikipedia. For a reference, try doing a little research on the film industry of Pakistan, and you will find out that no other city or state besides the state of Punjab, and the city of Lahore are authorized to make official films. Pollywood? hahaha Sync2k5 08:31, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I talked to Zak, who is from Peshawar, on the matter and he suggested including discussion of Pashto films and Pollywood. Now since the Culture Minister of Pakistan uses the term (in the link in the section), I do believe that makes it valid. How about you come up with some actual evidence since I have provided links for all of the statements if you want me to make changes instead? Tombseye 16:12, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Mr. Zak is from Britin, not from Peshawar. Now it is very odd because on that link I didn't find Culture Minister of Pakistan, rather it says "Culture Minister of Punjab". Not scholarly are we? Come on now no arguing with someone who owns entertainment shops in Kohat, Bannu, and Peshawar. We are also in the debugging business and I can assure you no movies take place in Peshawar nor do we print the term "Pollywood" on our labels. We just use Peshawar or any other city from where the material originates from. All is done in Lahore as far as making directing cutting producing films in Pakistan, where your special little “Culture Minister” probably originates from. Why take a Punjabis word over a Pashtun? Mazghe de kaar ke Tomzoeya? Pa hes poeye ge kha laya pa laya krat prat da internet ke lagawalee? Mumbo jumbo Sync2k5 21:36, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, but surely some people use the term as the Punjab culture minister used the term and Zak was familiar with the term as well? and films used to be made in Peshawar in the past, yes? I'm not saying I don't believe you, I'm just saying that we need more than what you've said, even though you may be 100% right. I'd appreciate it if you could find some reference that supports what you've said and I'm not taking anyone's word so much as going by an official website. I don't care if he's Punjabi or Chinese, but we do need some citation to make changes. I wrote a typo when I called him culture minister of Pakistan, so again my scholarly intent aside, the name of the article is Culture of Pakistan even if it is on the Culture minister of Punjab's page. Tombseye 22:04, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Punjab doesn't represent Pakistani culture, although thats what is widely believed and Punjabis would like everyone to believe. You are taking something from Culture Minister of Punjabs page and applying it to the Pashtuns? One could understand the nature of that website only by the fact that when it says Culture of Pakistan, it has a sign Culture Minister of Punjab. Discriminitory, arrogant? Is that your source? Fine with me. Pollywood ta larsha kamees toor mata rawra hahahaha No there isn't any movie that is made in Peshawar, when I am talking about made I'm talking about assembled. First Pashto movie was made by a Punjabi director at the request of the infamous Pashtun movie star Badir Munir who was a servant in his banglow. From there on all Pashto films are produced, directed, and assembled in Lahore. For example, NWFP is a conservertive and extremly religious province, now go watch some Pashto movies, totally contridictory. Heck there is one little stinky studium studio in Peshawar that is used by PTV whenever there is a concert or event. All new events now take place in Islamabad where you will see "Pathans" doing things totally unacceptible to Pashtuns, yet only possible to do outside of Pashtun area. Not that it does't happen in our areas, it does, but not openly. The only films that are created, produced, and assembled in Peshawar are the many amatuer wedding vidoes, hujra dance videos, and the recent phenomnan of debbuggings. Find me a single label of audio, video, dvd, cd, anything from that part of the world with “Pollywood” then you have made your case. There is no such thing. This is just a vision of the “some”. The reason why I am against it is because I see this as invasion of Punjabi/Hindustani/Baharati insertion in to the Pashtun fold. Sync2k5 22:20, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey look, I'm trying to be civil and I've made further changes based upon your valued input, but there is no need for you to accuse me of being dishonest or trying to promote the views of one group over another. I only used it because it's an example of the usage of the term Pollywood, which may be more of a reference to the Pashto language (with the 'P') rather than Peshawar anyway. Again, I am asking for some citations, that's how wikipedia operates. At any rate, I changed the sentence further based upon what you've told me. Tombseye 22:28, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm not accusing you of anything. Sync2k5 
05:55, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Pollywood issue has been resovled now, as I couldn't see any mentioned term on Pashtuns article anymore, I will thank to Tomb and Sync to rectify it. For Sync now "Larsha Pekhahawar ta kamees tor mala raura - Taza Taza gwaloona drey salor mala raura" (Alaka Pollywood ta lar nashey) hahaha!      Haider 12:23, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh for Tombseye "Go to Peshawar and take me a black shirt and three four fresh flowers also" (don't go to Pollywood). Just trying to appease friends around and release tentions, after all all of us helping on a featured article to make it more worthful. Take care.      Haider 12:58, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pollywood?

message: Congratualtions to everyone who contributed to this article. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 10:24, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Congrats 

message: In (Pashtunwali) Pashtuns code of life there was no need to be mentioned any theory about Pashtuns origin like Bani Israel while it was already mentioned in Pashtuns featured article, it should be rectified.  Thanks!   Haider 23:25, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I don't know who did the edits, but they wanted that theory to be seen everywhere. Feel free to delete it from the Pashtunwali article. Tombseye 23:29, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Pashtunwali]] 

message: I think Polo should be included in the sports section. The Yousafzai are well known for playing Polo. Sync2k5 20:57, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't have much idea about the game but if Pashtuns plays it then it should be mentioned in the sports section aswell, Chitral and some other places are very famous for Polo, if I am not wrong.   Haider 12:16, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Added polo. Good call. Tombseye 21:39, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: here is a reference link if needed: http://www28.brinkster.com/pakistan4ever/htmls/nwfp/nwfp.asp Sync2k5 20:05, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sports 

message: I wanted to know if we could use this image in the article, so I've listed it on Wikipedia:Requested copyright examinations. —Khoikhoi 04:24, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Question about copyright

message: Images should be included of Pakistani Pasthtuns as the majority of them reside in Pakistan.
: You should have signed first atleast we must know to whome we are replying to ~ Thanks ~     Haider 20:04, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We can include pictures of Pakistani Pashtuns as long as someone can find some that have no copyright problems. Otherwise we can't just put any pictures in the article. This article is a featured article and has to maintain its high quality. The pictures Khoikhoi is working to get approved are pictures of Pashtuns so I believe they will suffice for now. Khushal Khan Khattak and Rahman Baba were technically from the Pakistani side of the border so I believe they constitute Pashtuns from Pakistan anyway. Tombseye 20:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pakistani Pashtuns 

message: Those of you interested in greater collaboration on pashtun issues I hope you will join 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Wiki-Pashtuns
--Zak 19:30, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Wiki-Pashtuns 

message: We need to find out how many Pashtuns there are in Canada. For sure there are TONS of them. We just have to find out how many.User:tajik-afghan
: As a Pashtun, what should I take your word "TONS" for Pashtuns in Canada or it is your scale to weight Pashtuns like this, how many Pashtuns will level your one ton??    Haider 08:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay it is a slang like "ton" is being used for thousand. No problem. Take care.     Haider 20:28, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pashtuns in Canada? 

message: Can you include information about Rahim Shah in the music section? Rahim Shah's first Pushto album, Peera was a well-rounded album, consisting of fast-paced, catchy Pushto songs. Tracks that stood out were Peera, Ro Ro Ra Za and Izhaar.  http://www.khyberwatch.com/index/yarana3.JPG Also, the picture is from the PAK-AFGHAN friendship concert in Kabul I think.  Advil 02:01, 27 July 2006
:Ok thanks. I will add his picture to the music section very soon.tajik-afghan 15:13, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Famous Pakistani Pashto Singer

message: There is no image of imran khan who lead pakistan to win 1992 crickit world cup. Shahid afridi is a famous player but not a great player like imran khan was.
: A picture of Imran Khan should have mentioned because his batting and bowling performances was great amongst all other Pashtun cricketers. That should be rectified without any delay. Thanks!     Haider 09:30, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Imran khan is greatest pashtun sportsman

message: The Buddhas of Bamiyan have hardly nothing to do with Pashtuns. I say we remove it and get a picture of another ancient structure or painting or artifact or anything else. Any suggestions? User:tajik-afghan 01:33, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Buddhas of Bamiyan picture should be removed 

message: A large majority of Indians who claim to be Pathan cannot heter single word of Pashto or Dari. They are usually descendants of converts over periods of generations who adapted the last name KHAN to justify their Muslimness to the Hindus. I strongly disagree of including this picture in the article. They don’t even have a clue as to what clan or tribe they belong too!!! User:Advil 3:33, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: (No Fake Pathans) Shah Rukh Khan picture should be removed

message: Are the views of Amanullah Ghilzai widely enough accepted to merit two long sections in this article? Are they widely accepted at all? I notice that these two large sections were added to this featured article with no discussion on the talk page. - Jmabel | Talk 21:51, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now removed. - Jmabel | Talk 22:25, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Amanullah Ghilzai 

message: This section is too long and really needs to be wikified, but shouldn't be but on the page Pashtunwali, and not this one?  Mar de Sin Speak up! 01:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is one of the two sections I refer to in my previous comment. - Jmabel | Talk 00:29, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Now removed. - Jmabel | Talk 22:25, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks. Mar de Sin Speak up! 14:35, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section "New theory about the history of the code of Pashtunwali or Pakhtunwali" 

message: The cite provided for 11 million Pashtuns also mentions that most of these Pashtuns actually use Urdu as a mother tongue, showing their ancestry from Pashtun Muslims who settled down and married with local Muslims. Only 5000 of the Indian Pashtuns speak Pashto according to that cite. They are probably Pashto-speaking Hindus and Sikhs who consider themselves Afghans. Or, they could be Kabulliwallahs. When speaking about the Pashtun ethnicity, we are speaking about those who speak the language as well and follow the culture. Not those who are of Pashtun lineage. If they could be called Pashtun, then Arab-descended Moplahs, who speak Malayalam, could be called Arabs, Somali-speaking clans can call themselves Arabs, and Parsis who speak Gujarati and are long Indianized, can call themselves Persian. We dont see their numbers on the Arab and Persian population statistic. Afghan Historian 22:25, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: please see Pashtun diaspora --Zak 23:22, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pashtuns in India