Jump to content

Talk:Pashtuns

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lorstaking (talk | contribs) at 18:16, 7 March 2024 (→‎Henry Wlater as a source?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former featured articlePashtuns is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 28, 2007.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 2, 2006Featured article candidatePromoted
December 4, 2006Featured article reviewDemoted
January 23, 2007Good article nomineeListed
February 22, 2007Featured article candidatePromoted
December 5, 2008Featured article reviewDemoted
March 11, 2017Peer reviewReviewed
Current status: Former featured article

Semi-protected edit request on 27 November 2023

The total number of Pashtuns should be corrected to around 62 Million if we add all the Pashtuns 40+18 million in Pakistan and Afghanistan and around 4 million across the world as mentioned below it in different countries. 94.109.225.23 (talk) 09:29, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Pinchme123 (talk) 05:41, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi I agree with him and for the sources I guess he's just mentionning those numbers + sources already present in the Infobox 2A02:A03F:64ED:2600:B167:7D27:1B08:1ED1 (talk) 19:50, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Shadow311 (talk) 19:59, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
just that in the "Total population" the figure, which is old (2009), should be updated following the info in "Regions with significant populations", values being more recent (2023), so perhaps this :
| pop = c.60 million
instead of this
| pop = c.49 million[1]
thanks 2A02:A03F:64ED:2600:B167:7D27:1B08:1ED1 (talk) 19:38, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Thickynugnug (talk) 08:37, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
hi.. sources are already there the more recent ( 2023 ) data for Pakistan and so on that should just replace the total ( an estimation of 2009, 14 years ago, a lot especially for an ethnic group with such RISING population ).... 2A02:A03F:64ED:2600:A59E:2470:2465:D527 (talk) 20:39, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: The reviewer asked for the references to be provided on the talk page. Unless they are provided here, the request does not meet the requirement for SUNS - Any edit request must be accompanied by a detailed and specific description of what changes need to be made. Needless to say, detailed and specific descriptions are only those which are accompanied by their references in their correct locations (per WP:EDITXY: "Propose a specific change on a talk page").  Spintendo  23:35, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 10 December 2023

Change the "Hindu minority" to "Zoroastrian minority" House-of-Nashir (talk) 13:01, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Shadow311 (talk) 17:15, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bactrian theory

@HistoryofIran may you please explain why you remived the Bactrian section? As the section was supported by academic sources Afghan.Records (talk) 00:43, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Afghan.Records: Regarding these additions, can you provide URLs to the sources for verification, WP:NOR, etc. @HistoryofIran: The 'descent from Kushan' thing is only a passing mention, a one liner - "So that was the end of the Kushan Empire, though their descendants are still the Pashtun and the Kashmiris." The source doesn't delve on it, so I don't think we should use it. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:50, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, the author has no expertise in this area either, according to the site, she has a doctorate in Classical Art and Archaeology. They're also now edit warring to add non-WP:RS to support their POV [1] [2]. I've already made three reverts, I'll just wait for the verdict at ANI [3]. HistoryofIran (talk) 11:40, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Dr. Karen Carr is Associate Professor Emerita, Department of History, Portland State University her having a another degree does not mean she is not qualified. However I respect your objection and I would add new evidence from Andre Wink about it. Afghan.Records (talk) 16:06, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it does, she's not even a historian, and this isn't exactly her forte either; I'm not gonna link you the rules again. Also, you are still trying to push the pov that the Khalajs are anything but Turkic [4], something you got blocked for last time. HistoryofIran (talk) 04:40, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I provide scholar opinions on the subject especially experts such as Wink and Doerfer who is known for his focus on the Khalaj. Also, I have not removed or edited any statements on their turkic origin but rather provided alternative views. For the violations I did last time was because I was unaware of the rules it was one of my first edits. Also, I am not pushing any views Im providing scholarly views, if they don't match with your views don’t make them invalid. I have removed Dr Carr as requested, but I will certainly be adding more information from historians and experts. Afghan.Records (talk) 05:59, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately I don’t have access to the links if I were to provide you with such it can be regarded ar pirating tho im not certain but I recommend you check the available sites I wlcan however send you the pdf for them Afghan.Records (talk) 16:08, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Afghan.Records: Please provide the URLs, PDFs, Google Book links, etc for the missing ones if possible. I wouldn't use Carr's source, it is just a passing mention. Besides, it is too big of a claim that Pashtun/Kashmiris are direct descendants of them. Partly descended, possible. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:57, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Understandable, I will remove Carrs statement. However, I can not provide all the links, I did for some, but some are for purchase. It would be ethically wrong if I do, maybe even illegal not sure. Afghan.Records (talk) 05:49, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 4 January 2024

There are 21 Million Pashtuns in Afghanistan in 2023 Here is the source : https://www.worlddata.info/languages/pashto.php 2001:871:261:80C4:BDEC:6777:154E:3B98 (talk) 13:42, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Geardona (talk to me?) 21:42, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pashtuns in india number exaggerated

There are NOT 3.2 million Pashtuns in india and the source is a verbal arbitrary statement by an individual as the source without any actual fact checking. Please correct this section. 2607:FEA8:1323:EC00:4C25:7C29:756A:A32F (talk) 13:38, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a mire reliable source for it? Afghan.Records (talk) 18:05, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Indian official census states a far lower lumber, around 27,000 if I recall correctly.
The currently cited source (a politician with their own agendas) is not reliable in comparison.
However, some people are obsessed with inflating the number of Pashtun living in India. Solblaze (talk) 20:04, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bactrian origin

Please state your concern about the Bactrian origin if Pashtuns here before disrupting Afghan.Records (talk) 17:57, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Never edited?

So, it says I reverted edits from the recently blocked Afghan.Records, but I never remember reverting any edits on here. I only remember warning Afghan for edit warring and disrupting peace. If the edit is an incorrect edit, please fix it as I did not do anything, I swear. Thatoneguylol101 (talk) 06:00, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Me being temporarily banned at nothing to do with this page. so can you please refer it to it was before because you have removed crucial information. Afghan.Records (talk) 01:03, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ignore the typos Afghan.Records (talk) 01:04, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Afghan.Records Please explain what you're trying to do here. Your edit (revert) changed a lot of info. HistoryofIran (talk) 01:25, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scythian and yuezhi

I think in the paragraph where talk of " scythian" tribe is quoted, it should be made clear that the Strabo meant yuezhis not scythians ( look the main yuezhi article for more info,) 178.232.61.65 (talk) 12:24, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Henry Wlater as a source?

Henry walter is not a reliable source he isn’t even a historian Afghan.Records (talk) 01:15, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article per WP:NPOV, presents "all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources". Bellew's theory is a historical position, and other historical positions are mentioned in the article, such as the theory of Pashtun descent from Israelites (though highly unlikely). You have been warned and reverted by others, such as User:HistoryofIran who astutely noted: "This is hypocrisy. Fair enough that you remove poorly sourced information, but conveniently you only do it with info you don't agree with. You have no issue using poor sources if they fit your POV." Thanks for your understanding, AnupamTalk 01:50, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Interestingly my sources from the 21st century about the Bactrian and Sogdians origin of Pashtuns from actual historians were deleted and but a 19th century surgeons view are cherry picked and published as facts.
My sources from Cambridge, Andre Wink, and Oxford university were called poor but Henry Walter is reliable? HistoyofIran has no fave calling me a hypocrite being the person he is and pushes a surgeons view over actual historians.
More edits doesn’t mean a person has more knowledge in the case of HOI more edits more propaganda and false information he has spread.
I have never seen hypocrisy on this level deleting the Bactrian sources from Cambridge History of Iran publishings and Sogdian sources from Oxford publications then saying “Bellew's theory is a historical position” giving it validation and calling me a hypocrite?
For this reason there should be restrictions on this page because its not a grammar fixing page people who actually believe a surgeon is more reliable and historically accurate than modern academics has no right editing a page of a whole ethnic group. Afghan.Records (talk) 03:40, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, this is enough. You've had your WP:ROPE, the fact that you still try to justify your disruptive edits is baffling. For anyone interested, see their previous ANI report [5]. This user is in no position to talk about neutrality. HistoryofIran (talk) 17:01, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well I am done with you pushing your agenda and bias and bullying inexperienced editors. Pushing Henry walter as a source says enough about your ability to provide proper and unbiased information, coupled with the fact that you conveniently ignore the part that he is a surgeon and to put even more sugar on top you ignore the part where he said Bangash are the descendants of Samanids and push and cherry pick tiny bits of what you like. You know you cant make a good argument so you proceed to accuse me of what you are actually doing. Afghan.Records (talk) 17:29, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When did I push Henry Walter? Link a diff. HistoryofIran (talk) 17:33, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bellew's hypothesis is sensible and of historical interest. There are many theories mentioned here, most of which are implausible. It's fine to mention this in historical context, and there is only one sentence devoted to it. I'm not sure why Afghan Records is getting so worked up about it. As noted above, this may be a personal POV issue. Lorstaking (talk) 18:16, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pseudo sources

Shockingly a lot of the sources in this page are motivated and cherry picked can someone with actual history knowledge take a look at them? The page stinks of propaganda and false narratives Afghan.Records (talk) 15:19, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference :1 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).