Talk:Timeline of the War in Afghanistan (2001–2021)

message: Is there anyway all these pages could be merged into one or 2 articles? I don't mean to downplay the importance of the effort, but documenting every press conference and announcement seems a little over the top, eh? Ewlyahoocom 04:15, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Would it not be more sensible to have just an article for every year? There is a distinct lack of clarity within the way these pages are described. Jez ☎ ✉ ✍ 17:30, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge? 

message: The page Timeline of the War in Afghanistan (2001–present) is a mismatch of different styles. However, I suggest that all months be moved into one year 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004. While I understand the idea behind the different months, two of the busiest years for Coalition forces in Afghanistan have been in 2006 and 2007 where the format was changed again. Comments on each years page and here please!!  Jez ☎ ✉ ✍ 20:32, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Any coments?? Jez t e C 12:10, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

text: I misunderstood originally, so ignore my past edits. Yes, all months should be moved into their respective years. What other military conflicts however are broken by year rather than having one large continuous article with multiple support articles? --Enzuru 20:19, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: DONE for 2001 in Afghanistan / 2002 in Afghanistan / 2003 in Afghanistan / 2004 in Afghanistan. 2001 / 2002 / 2003 all need to be edited down as there is too much information. I.E Rocket attacks on bases, or even injured troops. 2004 needs an edit to removge lots of headers. There is no 2005 in Afghanistan, and the style changes significantly for 2006 / 2007 / 2008. There is no current page on 2009.. Jez t e C 21:07, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge for months for 2001 / 2002 / 2003 / 2004 

message: I have not read this article from one end to the other, but I have not been able find any date for when foreign (NATO) troops was stationed on land. I came here to find when Denmark got involved in the war, but it does not say. It also does not say in the article 2001 in Afghanistan or 2002 in Afghanistan. Velle (talk) 20:05, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  When did the foreign troops land? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Timeline of the War in Afghanistan (2001–present). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20051216152224/http://www.msnbc.com:80/news/664935.asp?cp1=1 to http://www.msnbc.com/news/664935.asp?cp1=1
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:15, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Timeline of the War in Afghanistan (2001–present). 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/20100129051149/http://seattletimes.nwsource.com:80/html/nationworld/2010535631_apeufranceafghanistan.html to http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2010535631_apeufranceafghanistan.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:50, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: With a title that starts Timeline, this article is presented as a list of events that wiki-links to relevant articles. It follows the Manual of Style for Timelines, so I cannot help but assess it as a List rather than any other class of article. However, I find its inclusion in the Crime WikiProject somewhat puzzling. While I understand that crime happens in a war zone and war crimes are a reality, I would only expect individual articles where there is a significant criminal aspect to have a banner template added. By applying the banner template to this article, the implication is that the whole war is a crime, and I am sure that is not what was intended when the banner was added. So, I want to test why the crime banner is applicable to this article, otherwise I will remove it, because I think it more probably, than not, falls outside the scope of the Crime WikiProject. However, this is also an area of uncertainty, so I want to understand the thinking of others, first. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 00:18, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I have thought about this for a while and decided that this article is a list for the purposes of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography but is of Low importance because of the military context of most of the crimes that are documented have occurred within. As a result these crimes are not usually investigated by a civil authority through judicial procedures but fall under a military jurisdiction and are dealt with by military tactics and strategy as warfare. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 22:56, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assessed as List but is it in scope for Crime WikiProject