Talk:Afghanistan/Archive 6

message: Is there an issue here as well? What are the rationals for inclusion or removal?—Cronholm144 18:21, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're supporting the removal of the main government site of Afghanistan? What's the purpose of removing this? I'm sure there is a purpose, probably that you want to hide it so to make people assume the country has no functioning government. Every article of nations has the official government sites so why should Afghanistan's be removed?--Hurooz (talk) 15:17, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No I am not. I am trying to understand whether or not there is a controversy. My question still stands; I have heard one argument to include the site and none supporting its removal. Why was it included in the revert war?—Cronholm144 23:59, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Government site 

message: A good start is to look at all of the services that are available in country - that many people have no idea exist. Too many, Afghanistan is thought of as the fifth poorest and most conservative Islamic country in the world. However, to those internationals that have been or live there know, it is a Country that grabs your imagination and despite all of its difficulties has something that makes almost all visitors say they will return to one day.  Daily life too many internationals, is far removed from what those see on the news and would expect - look at the restaurant listings on www.afghanguide.biz to get a feel for the unreported side of life that the public often misses.  My suggestion is to add a section to the Afghanistan over view on what day to day life is like for an international living in Country - it may be surprisingly normal.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.205.198.178 (talk) 09:54, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Afghanistan - what is life like for internationals operating in Country? 

message: :The constitution of Afghanistan has no jurisdiction over the English language. There are sources for both Afghan, Afghani, and Afghanistani being used of persons from Afghanistan in English. Deletion of sourced content that is a product of consensus (see Demonym section above) is vandalism, Hurooz. The other things you did, I've no problem with. Carl.bunderson (talk) 20:43, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok I looked at the other changes you made, sorry I didn't notice before. The edit I just made maintained your changes to the article, changing only the demonym section to include what you want as well as the other sourced options. Carl.bunderson (talk) 20:47, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not aware of any WP policy saying we have to use a country's constitution as the basis for our encyclopedia. Show me where that is. The references are from dictionary.reference.com. Where are you getting free dictionary.com from? On dictionary.reference.com, the entry for Afghani comes from the American Heritage Dictionary, and the entry for Afghanistani comes from WordNet, which is done by Princeton University. How are these unreliable sources? All I wish to do is preserve sourced information. You may not be, but you strike me as a pov-pusher trying to make sure that English-speaking persons call persons from Afghanistan nothing but 'Afghans' because thats what you want. If you want to do that, if the other terms are ignorant, please spend your time soapboxing somewhere else. Carl.bunderson (talk) 21:24, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Click on WordNet, then on Semantic lexicon, then on Semantics and read the def slowly. You'r not understanding what WordNet is. It is a new system to help explain the meanings of certain complicated words that are not found in most dictionaries and afghanistani is one such word out of 150,000 words stored in WordNet.--Churra (talk) 23:20, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I can't find anything on WordNet's site to suggest that the terms in it would not actually be words; and I was able to find simple words, such as cat. But the small size of the database, given the size of English, does seem odd. And WordNet doesn't call itself a 'semantic lexicon'; rather, a lexical database. If you could address those issues, I'd appreciate it. But I would be willing to concede to you on this word. Do you have any objections to the source for 'Afghani'? Carl.bunderson (talk) 00:14, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't matter that Afghans only call themselves Afghans. It may make it the "proper" demonym, but it is not the only one. If there are reputable sources for Afghani and Afghanistani, they should be included. You grant that Afghani is used, sometimes, by foreigners. The vast majority of English speakers, who use the English WP, are foreigners by Afghan standards. If some of us use Afghani, it needs to be acknowledged. Carl.bunderson (talk) 21:26, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Hurooz and Bejnar are Afghan nationalists. It doesn't matter how you explain it to them, they are against any denonym other than Afghan because according to them it threatens the "Afghan state".  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.93.211.252 (talk) 21:50, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Excess section

message: Seriously, it's a crying shame. I'd do it myself (the way I rectified Morocco's atrocious infobox a couple of months ago), but obviously that's impossible now. There is NO REASON that the name of the country in the OFFICIAL LANGUAGE should be simply ignored in the infobox. For that matter, the first-line report of the native name in Pashto includes no transliteration--that's a serious problem, since not everyone can read Arabic script. Heck, I'm fluent in Arabic and I can only barely make out what it says, thanks to differences in the alphabet. Furthermore, what exactly IS the name of Afghanistan? There is consensus on "republic" for the translation, but is it "Jamhūrī" or "Dawlat"? The Farsi article has it as "Jamhūrī"/whatever in both Pashto and Dari, but the German article has "Dawlat" for Pashto and "Jamhūrī" for Dari, and the French article has "Dawlat" for both! I would personally regard the Farsi article as authoritative, considering that people in Afghanistan actually speak it (Dari being a dialect of Farsi, if that), but I don't know for sure. Thoughts? Lockesdonkey (talk) 05:32, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dowlat and Jamhuri are both Arabic words and have the same meaning. It does not matter. Both Jamhuri and Dowlat have been adopted in Pashto and Persian. I think the Pashto version should also be added to the info-box.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.83.144.56 (talk) 01:17, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As a speaker of Arabic, I know that in Arabic at least, "Dawlah" means "state" (or sometimes "government" depending on context), while "Jumhuriyyah" specifically means "republic." Judging by the Wiktionary entry for "Dawlat", Farsi makes the same distinction. What is the name according to the Afghan government? Lockesdonkey (talk) 02:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello? Why has nobody addressed this? C'mon already! Lockesdonkey (talk) 05:43, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is there no Pashto in the native-language section in the infobox? 

message: http://www.ii.umich.edu/csas/aboutus/contactus http://www.brandeis.edu/registrar/catalog/one-subject.php?subject_id=6550 this sources admits in historical senses that Tibet and Afghanistan should be considered South Asian http://www.britac.ac.uk/institutes/SSAS/about.htm Tibetan and Afghan flag shown http://oscar.virginia.edu/asp/orgView.asp?txtId=26 http://www.hawaii.edu/asiaref/sasia/sawebsites.htm http://southasia.rutgers.edu/aboutsasp.html
Thegreyanomaly (talk • contribs) 03:00, December 11, 2007 
:Afghanistan is without a doubt part of both Central and South Asia - the only evidence you have to provide is the fact that it is a member of SAARC. What we are all disputing is your inference that it is part of the Indosphere. Green Giant (talk) 15:24, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  many more sources for afghanistan being south asian 

message: KabuliTajik, USAID Afghanistan labels the girls in that photo as being Afghan. On what authority are you using to call those girls Afghanistani? Kingturtle (talk) 19:45, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. It shouldn't be changed without a source. Carl.bunderson (talk) 20:00, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The image source describes them as "Afghan girls." So does the article. What's the problem, here? – Luna Santin (talk) 10:40, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Edit declined. No consensus. Also, the image to be edited is not specified. Please note that the instructions state: "This template should be accompanied by a specific description of the request." Sandstein (talk) 14:37, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image of girls 

message: Hallo!
In this article it would be correct to describe the important GIAAC, the Anti Corrupion Authority, which is an independant body with Izzatullah Wasifi as its general director. As there is an article on his name, that article could also be completed with a link back to this part. Suggestion to add it as "4.2"
Link to GIAAC: 
Zoors (talk) 23:54, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Military and law enforcement 

message: The link to Great Saud Revolution is set to link to Khalq. Only from there one can go to the GSR page. This should be corrected.85.1.154.127 (talk) 10:40, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  comment/suggestion 

message: suggestions: I would like to say that you need to write on the right top of first page name as such in pashto( د افغانستان اسلامى جمهوريت),as it was written before in wikipedia.The name of Afghan government is written only in Persian mainly because of persian speaker influences at government due to Northern allaince which distorted the truth.Second,It is totally baseless and lies that Dari or persian is spoken by 70 pecent of Afghanistan's population,which clearly contradict with the true figures given in old Atlasses.If an irish or scottish write wrong information about UK and give misleading infos regarding UK, that Irish or Scottish is spoken by 70 percent of UK's Population or claim that 75 percent of UK's Population are irish or scottish, what will be your reactions? Third, A country could be recognised and defined by the original inhabitants of that country.Now a day every body knows that the so-called afghan government is occupied by Persian speakers of Northern Allaince which is getting direct and indirect support from Iran which is working very hard to distroy and ditort the afghan histry in order to establish irani thoughts,idealogy,language,culture etc,that is why the wikipedia is provided with false information. - posted in article by user 91.149.9.241.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingturtle (talk • contribs) 17:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Very amusing comments. Someone should let him/her know that this is not a forum. AntiFascism (talk) 00:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Whether we like it or not, he/she has SOME point. As I noted above, Pashto IS an official language of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, and currently there is only Dari/Persian in the "native language" field of the infobox. Since I speak no Pashto, I cannot say what the official name is with certainty; I am guessing from my knowledge of Arabic, a dubious proposition. I would advocate that Pashto (with a suitable transliteration/transcription) be added to the top of the infobox alongside the current Dari (though not necessarily one on top of the other). So ADD IT NOW! Lockesdonkey (talk) 18:07, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  comment/suggestion 

message: I think it's pretty obvious what the original content uploader intended.
The biased image should be replaced.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by JR869 (talk • contribs) 05:31, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Even though I'm Russian, I agree it is anti-American. I have changed it. RussianRoket (talk) 07:43, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed it back again. Let's discuss here first. No offence, I liked the older pictures better.--John (talk) 08:08, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I made a mistake with the new picture. I'm putting this image from Commons but here it shows something else. How do I fix this? RussianRoket (talk) 08:15, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: THe images used should be agreed here first before they are added to the article. --John (talk) 18:45, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I agree with RussianRoket, so I am putting his photo in back in. The Humvee picture is POV (yes, we all get the metaphor, ha ha). Either don't include a picture or include a picture that shows what is currently happening there. And, I don't think the US performing AAA duties in Afghanistan so this photo is misleading. --MarsRover (talk) 20:35, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias exhibited in display of image of US Humvee stuck in sand 

message: Someone should fix this paragraph to make it neutral:
The result of the fighting was that the vast majority of the elites and intellectuals had escaped to take refuge abroad, a dangerous leadership vacuum thereby coming into existence. Fighting continued among the victorious Mujahideen factions, eventually giving rise to a state of warlordism. The most serious fighting during this period occurred in 1994, when over 10,000 people were killed in Kabul alone. The chaos and corruption that dominated post-Soviet Afghanistan in turn spawned the rise of the Taliban. The Taliban developed as a politico-religious force, and eventually seized Kabul in 1996. By the end of 2000 the Taliban were able to capture 95% of the country, aside from the opposition (Northern Alliance) strongholds primarily found in the northeast corner of Badakhshan Province. The Taliban sought to impose a very strict interpretation of Islamic law.
Dupree3 (talk) 00:20, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I took a stab at it. Kingturtle (talk) 12:47, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV paragraph in Soviet invasion and civil war section 

message: First of all stop throwing around accusations. I removed those numbers because those are not written in the actual Britannica. They are just written in a PDF document NOT in the actually Encyclopedia and those numbers are estimates from the early 1900s. Ironically this user's other sockpuppet complains that the CIA and Iranica numbers are outdated but wants to use numbers from the early 1900s. What is actually written in the Britannica Encyclopedia is:
CLICK HERE FOR LINK TO ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA -- Farsiwan22 (talk) 22:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  What the <u>Encyclopedia</u> Britannica actually says, it agrees with [[Iranica]] 

message: Most of the districts are coloured and should be fixed. 
*Information has been taken from the AIMS.ORG.AF website while most of the numbers or districts have been coloured in correctly. 
*That aside many of those districts which are not included in AIMS.ORG.AF should not be coloured as Tajik Districts.
*It could be a Pashtun or Hazara district and yet coloured wrongfully. 
*Also the MIXED DISTRICTS SHOULD BE COLOURED SEPARATELY.
Here are the districts which need to be corrected.
Farah Province
----
*Lash O Jawain---Mixed District
 
Ghazni Provinces
----
*Zana Khan----100%Pashtun
Kabul Province
----
*Char Asyab---Pashtun, Tajik and few Hazara.
*Deh Sabz---70% Pashtun, 30% Tajik
*Guldara---around 50 % Pashtoon and 50 % Tajik
*Istalif---mix of Tajik, Pashtoon and Hazara
Parwan Province
----
Charikar---mex of Tajiks and Pashtuns  —Preceding
Siagerd(Ghorband)---Mix of Tajik Pashtun and Hazara
Shinwari---Tajik and Pashtoon
Faryab
----
*Dawlatabad---COMPOSITION: Pashtun 40% Hazara Tajik 10% Uzbek 30% Turkman 20% other:
Takhar
----
*Rustak---Tajik 50% Uzbek 50%
*Taliqan---40% Tajik, 40% Uzbek,
--99.224.173.167 (talk) 07:02, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Afghanistan - ETHNIC MAP 

message: I think the three paragraphs as they currently stand is too much information, and bordering on not conforming to NPOV due to the information that has been chosen to be present. Anyone else agree that the introduction needs to be shortened? --Rebroad (talk) 17:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it would hurt to shorten it. I've copied and pasted, and removed what I think should be removed, thusly:
Afghanistan, officially the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (Persian: جمهوری اسلامی افغانستان, Pashto: د افغانستان اسلامى جمهوريت ), is a landlocked country that is located approximately in the center of Asia. It is variously designated as geographically located within Central Asia,[3][4] South Asia,[5][6] and the Middle East.[7][8][9] It has religious, ethno-linguistic, and geographic links with most of its neighboring states. It is bordered by Pakistan in the south and east,[10] Iran in the west, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan in the north, and China in the far northeast.
Afghanistan is a culturally diverse nation, lying [sic] on the crossroads between the East and the West. Historically, it has both seen various invaders and conquerors, and been the centre of emprires. In the 19th century, Afghanistan became a buffer state in "The Great Game" played between the British Indian Empire and Russian Empire. On 19 August, 1919, following the third Anglo-Afghan war, the country gained full independence from the United Kingdom over its foreign affairs. Since the late 1970s Afghanistan has suffered continuous civil war, which included foreign interventions in the form of the 1979 Soviet invasion and the 2001 US-led invasion that toppled the Taliban government. 
Carl.bunderson (talk) 08:36, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The modern nation "Afghanistan", which this entire article is based on, was founded by Ahmad Shah Durrani in 1747. That must be mentioned in the intro. I think the way the intro was for last 1 year is perfect. It mentions all the major things instead of the unimportant ones. I don't like User:Carl.bunderson's version of the intro. Afghanistan has a very long history compare to many other nations so its expected to see a longer intro than others. What needs to be removed is the sentence "During the Cold War Afghanistan bordered the Soviet Union" in the first paragraph, that is unimportant...the sentence "Ariana was the original name of Afghanistan back in the 1700s" at the begining of the second paragraph must also be removed because that is absolutely false.--203.175.65.23 (talk) 19:42, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content before table of contents 

message: The Afghan anthem on You-tube [].
Afghanistan's national anthem is the one which is being played inside Afghanistan. This was never an anthem but a revoltionary song and a great one, but the one that was used in the past was Awalmings Zeba Watan. Keep your anti-Afghanistan vies at home this is not a forum nor any Tajikistan forum.Shikab--Shikab (talk) 12:49, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Anthem

message: We afghans have to use the word Dari and not say in terms of historical facts that it is Dari Persian because this is culturely incorrect because this is like pushing iranian culture instead of afghan culture I want to remove all Persian Words from Afghanistan wikipedia and should no longer be used with Dari. Afghans are by no means persian by ethnicity, language or culture. Its the iranians that have copied afghan culture. Iranians should be neutral and stay out of afghanistan history and all related issues.Pashtun786 (talk) 01:08, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please refrain from nationalistic POV and note that the proper wikilink to the language is Dari (Persian) and not Dari. Carl.bunderson (talk) 06:40, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dari NOT Persian 

message: Hi,
Per request from 
DurraniPashtun, I have added another population distribution picture.
He has issues with the current picture, so I put both pictures in and identified the data sources and time of creation of both pictures.  Having both pictures is easier because both are sincere efforts and there was a bit of a delete war as to which picture was preferable.
DurraniPashtun, please supply commentary in the Afghanistan#Ethnic groups section giving references to support why the picture I have added is more authoritative than the 1997 U. of Texas picture.
Also note that the sources for the picture you asked me to include are diverse and unclear, for example, the image sources it to "AIMS".  Under AIMS there is a red link to Arab International Media Services but the only such thing I could find is here.  Perhaps you could add an article for Arab International Media Services and comment on the sources of data and methods of collection and who collected and when it was collected for the picture that you prefer.  The caption gives numbers from CIA 2007 and Encyclopedia Iranica 2007, but the picture itself when you go to the image description does not reference CIA, so it is not clear that the areas outlined in the picture are proportional numerically to the aggregate numbers culled from CIA and Encyclopedia Iranica.
:AIMS, with regard to Afghanistan, is usually "Afghanistan Information Management Services", a UN based a joint venture between UNOCHA and UNDP, which acts as an information clearinghouse and coordinator for assistance organizations (NGOs) working in Afghanistan. See Afghanistan Information Management Services website.--Bejnar (talk) 16:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK I've added this AIMS as Afghanistan Information Management Services.  Erxnmedia (talk) 17:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

text: DurraniPashtun is another sockpuppet of the controversial banned editor User:Beh-nam and you are helping him with his controversial edits. The falsified colorful ethnic map was made by him, who is a racist person towards Pashtuns. He is a Tajik but giving himself names as Pashtun. As a result of all these findings I am reverting all your edits because you are clearly here to support a sockpuppet and that is against the rules of Wikipedia.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by GingizKhan (talk • contribs) 08:39, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population distribution picture 

message: The languages section currently begins,
"The CIA World Factbook on languages spoken in Afghanistan is shown in the right image box. Persian (Dari dialects) 50% and Pashto 35%; both are"
As is, the sentence makes it sounds like "The CIA World Factbook on languages spoken in Afghanistan" is the subject of the sentence and that it is shown on the right! The entry should be clear that the map is not from the CIAWF but the data below it is.
I would like the editors to correct the grammar and clarify this statement. I suggest:
"The most common languages spoken in Afghanistan are Persian (Dari dialects) and Pashto. Both are Indo-European languages from the Iranian languages sub-family. Statistics from the CIA World Factbook are listed in the chart in the sidebar, below the map of languages by region." 76.105.244.126 (talk) 06:27, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Thanks for the suggestion. Carl.bunderson (talk) 19:04, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  proposed change to Languages section 

message: People assume that Aryans went to Afghanistan which is a lie. According to the ancient Indian books the Afghans were called Pakhta and the tribes living in the Afghanistan are were called Mleccha, which means a non-Aryan people. Note that the use of the word Aryan in India is the oldest. Afghans aren't Aryans but most do speak Indo-European languages which is not necessary similar to Aryan language. Please remove this from the History of Afghanistan.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.10.173.29 (talk) 21:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aryans in Afghanistan 

message: ::My recent edit should have read tag deletion, not ref; it finished before I realized my edit summary was wrong. Carl.bunderson (talk) 04:36, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Carl.bunderson edit 

message: The guy is just 18 years old . And he’s one of the best  football player ever, he’s trying his best to make it pro. He has made 
it in 19 years old. 2A02:810D:95C0:194:146C:BCD:1ADA:2C0C (talk) 20:51, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Amir Barahoie is the greatest football player ever