Jump to content

Talk:Taliban

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by PanjshirLions (talk | contribs) at 20:41, 16 October 2021 (Map Control: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article


Definite Article, "The", is not a Prefix

Although the definite article is applied to the steam as a prefix in Arabic, and not present at all in Pashto, this is not the case in English. Modern English has not undergone an agglutinative process by making any indexed article an affix of any kind. This mistake can be corrected by simply replacing "prefix" with "definite article."

In American English, a "the" prefix is used thereby referring to the group "The Taliban" rather than just "Taliban". Meanwhile, in English language media in Pakistan, there is often no prefix used.

14:29, 16 August 2021‎ Sven Merrit

Thank you. I have rewritten most of it, but not sure how to word it regarding the Pashto "Da". Can someone familiar with Pashto help? Nurg (talk) 06:20, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
According to David, Anne (2013). Descriptive Grammar of Pashto and its Dialects. pp. 312–313., it's a preposition meaning "of", which doubles up as a determiner (meaning "the") when used with a solitary noun phrase like this. I've edited the section accordingly. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 12:59, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Photo Reagan with people from Afghanistan/Pakistan

The captions of the photo with Ronald Regan meeting people from Afghanistan in '82 are incorrect and misleading: For the file it reads: "Meeting with a group of Afghan Freedom Fighters, Mujahideen, to discuss Soviet atrocities in Afghanistan, especially the September 1982 massacre of 105 Afghan villagers in Lowgar Province." In the article it says: "President Ronald Reagan meeting with Afghan Mujahideen leaders in the Oval Office in 1983"

The name of the group - of which I'm not at all sure any or all of the people on the photo were members - was Afghanistan Mujahedin Freedom Fighters Front. Certainly, "Mujahideen" is not another way to say Afghan Freedom Fighters, nor does it serve to explain the name. And, from what little I could find on them online (a doctor and a judge living in the EU), the people listed are incorrectly described as "Afghan Mujahideen leaders" (Mujahideen being someone who undertakes Djihad, religious struggle) and certainly would not have wanted in any way to represent the powers currently ruling Afghanistan. They were there as civilians, victims of violence, petitioners. At least some of the participants were from Pakistan, as the name of the image suggests. The description, as it is, is incorrect.

Side note: Due to the current popularity of the article, it is skewing search engine results. It seems this is being used by state media. The image is being used to symbolize a series of US administrations supporting paramilitaries against the Soviets. While this is a historical fact, using the photo with this caption seems especially unfair to the people portrayed.

I cannot edit the article, but maybe you can. Let's clear this up!

Add their website

Hi fellow Wikipedians.

Perhaps it was either the IEA wikipedia article or this article (that once had these websites linked) but I would like to ask for permission to submit an edit request to add their websites (defunct or not) back onto this page. I don't see why we shouldn't as political groups on Wikipedia often have their websites linked in the infobox. The websites in question are:

- alemarahenglish.asia - alemarahenglish.net (defunct) - alemarahpashto.com (defunct) - alemarahdari.net (defunct) - alemaraharabi.org (defunct) - alemarahurdu.org (defunct)

I look forward to hear your opinion on this. MillerLeut (talk) 10:20, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the current one would come under WP:ELOFFICIAL. But why the defunct ones? that wouldn’t make any sense. DeCausa (talk) 17:44, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Some articles on wikipedia mention that their websites are defunct, so I thought it would also be the case here. Of course, If it isn't needed to state their defunct sites, then we shouldn't. As of now, all their sites are defunct, so we can either add their sites out of historical interest (maybe link it to when it was last archived on archive.org?), or not add unless their site is functional. MillerLeut (talk) 02:13, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 September 2021

There's an error I would like to fix but it's hard to describe in words, I was wondering if I could get permission to edit it. Worldwar1989 (talk) 03:31, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you. — IVORK Talk 03:49, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Map Control

We need to update the map of control as the Panjshir resistance has gone on a pretty large offensive this past week. They have recaptured several districts and towns, such as: Andarab Khost and Farang cities of Baghlan Banow Village (Andarab) Dashtak (Possibly Disputed) Annaba Districts (Panjshir) As well as others. It is also expected that these offensives will continue.

It just simply makes no sense we aren't updating the map when the Taliban are losing more and more areas. We should be more up to date on this. PanjshirLions (talk) 20:41, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]