Talk:Afghanistan: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Use of Flag in Infobox: cb removal (final edit)
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 114: Line 114:
== Use of Flag in Infobox ==
== Use of Flag in Infobox ==


{{closed rfc top|result= Clear consensus was reached to keep the Taliban Flag inside the infobox, with over 13 different opinions sharing the quality for decision A for keeping the Taliban Flag. [[User:Noorullah21|Noorullah21]] ([[User talk:Noorullah21|talk]]) 01:28, 31 October 2021 (UTC) }}
<!-- [[User:DoNotArchiveUntil]] 15:01, 14 November 2021 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1636902084}}
{{rfc|hist|pol|rfcid=6F2C080}}
As the use of flags in the infobox seems to be causing some disagreement on this talk page I think it would be useful to reach a consensus specifically on this issue.
As the use of flags in the infobox seems to be causing some disagreement on this talk page I think it would be useful to reach a consensus specifically on this issue.


Line 193: Line 192:
:Perhaps a note that several international orgs/embassies still use the tricolor could be good, rather than just putting both flags next to each other as if they were coequal? Side note, who is staffing these embassies? It's not like there is a government to pay them. [[User:BSMRD|BSMRD]] ([[User talk:BSMRD|talk]]) 13:54, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
:Perhaps a note that several international orgs/embassies still use the tricolor could be good, rather than just putting both flags next to each other as if they were coequal? Side note, who is staffing these embassies? It's not like there is a government to pay them. [[User:BSMRD|BSMRD]] ([[User talk:BSMRD|talk]]) 13:54, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
::It appears from the source that their being funded through payments for consular assistance. It seems a bit dubious to me to even describe them as national embassies any more as they don't seem to be linked to any wider diplomatic structure.--[[User:Llewee|Llewee]] ([[User talk:Llewee|talk]]) 15:59, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
::It appears from the source that their being funded through payments for consular assistance. It seems a bit dubious to me to even describe them as national embassies any more as they don't seem to be linked to any wider diplomatic structure.--[[User:Llewee|Llewee]] ([[User talk:Llewee|talk]]) 15:59, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
{{closed rfc bottom}}


== Indian border claim ==
== Indian border claim ==

Revision as of 01:31, 31 October 2021

Former good articleAfghanistan was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 7, 2005Good article nomineeListed
March 6, 2009Good article reassessmentDelisted
September 24, 2019Good article nomineeNot listed
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on August 11, 2004, August 19, 2011, August 19, 2012, August 19, 2016, and August 19, 2020.
Current status: Delisted good article

This Flag dose not belong to Afghanistan !

This national flag and anthem and the content mentioned here have no national or international legitimacy. We ask you to remove this content as soon as possible. Arial-noori-sajad (talk) 12:45, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to me that the level of consensus for using Taliban symbols is unacceptably low, given the ramifications of the decision. The RFC that made the decision was open for less than 48 hours, and the decision appears to have had a number of unintended and unanticipated consequences. Much of the talk page since then has been people objecting to the decision.
Unless there's good reason not to, I suggest we have a wider RFC to review the decision to use Taliban symbols here. Kahastok talk 14:51, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's actually broken large chunks of the article, as well. This evidenced by the fact people in this very talk page are discussing how to best go about removing massive chunks of sections about the governance structure of the Islamic Republic, as well as the fact the memberships of international organisations currently belonging to the Islamic Republic are currently included as if they automatically now belong to the Taliban government. They don't. LegerityFortis (talk)

Despite not being recognized, Wikipedia still prefers to show defacto over dejure, afghanistan for the islamic republic still has its own page at the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, this is how Afghanistan is now. Noorullah21 (talk) 05:25, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Does Wikipedia prefer de facto over de jure? I don't see it in the Crimea article. Uvants (talk) 01:30, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
My bad for wording that incorrectly, but there was multiple RFCs and consensus to this, and they agreed on the inclusion of the Taliban. Noorullah21 (talk) 22:41, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the [Crimea] article, it specifies that it is "Controlled and governed as part of the Russian Federation".--Kappasi (talk) 13:21, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Could you point these out for me? There's lots on the talk page in recent weeks, so I could easily have missed them. But the decision I see is this RFC.
RFCs default to 30 days. This one was closed - not withdrawn, closed - by the original proposer after less than two days. This was not a discussion that was obviously finished - it was closed less than three hours after the last comment was made, after multiple editors had disagreed with the proposal. This seems highly premature, and as such, I do not consider this to be a high standard of consensus - to the point that I don't think a new RFC is unreasonable, if that's what the current article is based on.
But it might not be what the current article is based on. If you could point to other RFCs or whatever else, maybe I would take a different view. Kahastok talk 15:38, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I hadn't realized until you pointed it out that the opener of the RfC closed it. That is clearly a WP:BADNAC that should be reversed. We don't need a new RfC, we need that one to continue to completion. I recommend following the procedures in WP:CLOSECHALLENGE to undo the close. ― Tartan357 Talk 23:34, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Suddenly restarting an RFC weeks after it was ostensibly closed and archived isn't great either though. No, I think it'd be better to start a new RFC based on the recognition that the previous one was flawed. Kahastok talk 19:49, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The reason why I closed that RFC was because, as is explained in it, I dropped the aspect that was causing controversy and their was, with the exception of one responder, a universal consensus for the other changes proposed. The controversial part (i.e merging) was dealt with in a separate discussion on that talk page.Llewee (talk) 15:14, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:Llewee, can you demonstrate that it dealt with all the concerns that may have been raised, had the RFC been allowed to continue for more than a day and a half?
My guess is that the answer is no. Which makes it a rather weak consensus as these things go. And if someone does object, I see no reason why they shouldn't open a new RFC to have the discussion that was not had in that RFC. Kahastok talk 07:02, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Kahastok What I can demonstrate is that it was a very active discussion with a clear consensus for the changes that I implemented. You or anyone else are more than welcome to start a new RFC but given the way the hugh amount of discussion about this issue which has taken place on this talk page and elsewhere in recent months has broadly gone I would be very surprised if it produced a significantly different result. Llewee (talk) 07:26, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion did not include the word "flag" once, let alone build a consensus around a particular view on them. CMD (talk) 07:27, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we can keep Taliban insignia ALONG SIDE Islamic Republic signs? That might be better. Old!!man1234561234 (talk) 06:38, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since The Islamic Emirate is not officially recognized by any United Nations members, can we actually say Afghanistan is officially called the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan? As a matter of fact, all countries de facto continue to recognize the Islamic Republic since no nation has discredited the Republic and no one has recognised the new government. Some nations have engaged with the Taliban, but all have specified: Engagement and Recognition is different. So, how to put the Emirate in the official article for Afghanistan? I am sure Wikipedia prefers de jure over de facto, we see it in the Crimea article. So, since Afghanistan is de jure the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and no member of the United Nations have recognised the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, in this article, we should replace the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan with the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. Also, the Republic formed an in-exile government, headed by Amrullah Saleh, as said by the Afghan embassy to Switzerland. Sng Pal (talk) 12:26, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bruh do you really support corrupted government ServerScript (talk) 09:00, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The government may be corrupt, but it is recognized internationally and is the de jure government. No one recognises it. So, I ask to replace the Taliban flag with the Afghan tri-colour. The last time I wrote, the T20I world cup hadn't started. Now it has started in the United Arab Emirates, we see how the Afghan team is playing under the tri-colour, thus proving it's legitimacy and the Taliban flag's illegitimacy. And also, do you support the terrorist government? I think a terrorist government is as bad as a corrupt government, if not worse. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sng Pal (talkcontribs) 09:14, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. Afghanistan is playing under the tri-color flag in the tournament. The whole Wikipedia article about 2021 ICC Men's T20 World Cup has Afghanistan with tri-color flag. Throughout the stadium everyone is holding a tri-color flag, fans are even wearing clothes matching the tri-colors. Their official cricket twitter account (@ACBofficials) is using tri-color flag in their tweets. When they are themselves using the old flag, then why this taliban flag on Wikipedia? makes no sense. SochneyDe (talk) 21:46, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Because..they rule Afghanistan..? Doesn't matter if they aren't recognized, Transnistria is still a Wikipedia page despite not being recognized, USING the Tri-colour makes no sense when the Tri-Colour isnt even used by the current Afghan ruling government AKA the Taliban. Noorullah21 (talk) 01:21, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 October 2021

Talibans banned music, I think it should be said by Wikipedia.[1][2][3][4][5] Egon20 (talk) 11:14, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

 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. —Sirdog (talk) 23:01, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I asked to mention the fact that Talibans banned music in the wikipedia page since there is already a section that exclusively talks about music. Egon20 (talk) 07:35, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The anthem of taliban is called a cappella "anthem without music" ServerScript (talk) 08:59, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Use of Flag in Infobox

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Clear consensus was reached to keep the Taliban Flag inside the infobox, with over 13 different opinions sharing the quality for decision A for keeping the Taliban Flag. Noorullah21 (talk) 01:28, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As the use of flags in the infobox seems to be causing some disagreement on this talk page I think it would be useful to reach a consensus specifically on this issue.

Option A Continue using the flag of the Taliban

Option B Return to the tricolour of the deposed republic

Option C Use both

Option D Use neither

--Llewee (talk) 14:48, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

  • A - as the IEA is now Afghanistan & has been since 15 August 2021. It's simply the way it is, now. GoodDay (talk) 17:11, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Question: In events related to Afghanistan before 2021, will you also used the Taliban flag? For the Afghanistan national cricket team, which continues using the tricolor flag as of now, will you use the Taliban flag? Khestwol (talk)
They should be using the Taliban flag. GoodDay (talk) 22:41, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Khestwol, This discussion is focused specifically on what flag should be used in the pages infobox.--Llewee (talk) 23:46, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • A - The Flag is being used by the de facto government in its official meetings with everyone, the the previous regime no longer exists so no point in using the tricolor flag. Jibran1998 (talk) 17:28, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • A We've been over this, the Taliban is in charge and this is their flag. There is never going to be an official declaration declaring this as the "new" flag because the Taliban see themselves as being in full continuity with the Emirate from the 90s, just temporarily forced out of power. BSMRD (talk) 17:56, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • C, use both depending on the context. Khestwol (talk) 19:13, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • A, per BSMRD IntUnderflow (talk) 23:25, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • A, it's the flag of the country right now for all intents and purposes. Flags of previous political entities in the same territory should be used (or created if needed) just as it is done for every other country which had different regimes in the past. --MaeseLeon (talk) 03:55, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • There are numerous intents and purposes for which it is not the flag of the country. The Paralympics was one, every embassy would be another. CMD (talk) 04:09, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • A, its their flag for now. LondonIP (talk) 10:14, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • D, the Crimean approach. The main page should cover Afghanistan as a geographical entity and show no flag, at least as long as the international community doesn't sort things out (which doesn't seem to be happening soon). The political entity that is de facto controlling the country should have its own article at Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. Luxic (talk) 18:30, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • D, as per Luxic, if not then A as unless something changes there should be no point using the old flag to represent a country that no longer exists in a meaningful sense. Dawiston (talk) 20:49, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • D, Taliban is not recognized by any country, nor represents the country in the UN. I agree with Luxic's argument. Pahlevun (talk) 22:55, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Huge no to added "Flag of Taliban".... would be us adding a political party flag to a country flag parameter ....we would never add the Democratic Party party logo as the flag of the USA.Moxy- 23:06, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Last I checked, the logo of the Democratic Party isn't flying from all the flagpoles on capitol hill, is it?  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 04:04, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • A per BSMRD's argument. There are many examples of WP articles using the flag of the governments of nations/regimes with limited diplomatic recognition. Vladimir.copic (talk) 02:13, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • A per BSMRD. I should add that this question really shouldn't hone in on the flag. If the consensus ends up being in favor of any option other than A, that would presumably affect the entire article, not just the flag parameter, right? The real question is whether or not this article should focus on the IEA or be restructured (yet again) to describe Afghanistan not as a country but as a geographic area, which would require us to split the Afghanistan article into another IEA article (which is already being proposed and discussed elsewhere), etc. etc. If this RfC is genuinely proposing to only remove the flag while still having the article focus on the IEA (which would be very weird), then that wasn't made clear enough. Vanilla  Wizard 💙 04:04, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • My personal view is A, however, I wanted a consensus to be reached specifically on this issue as their have been a lot of arguments about it here in recent weeks and complaints that it hasn't been properly discussed.--Llewee (talk) 09:47, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • C or D. I would've honestly gone with option A, but I'm watching the developments in Cricket, and it's still, even after 2 months, premature to simply go with Taliban flag. Because the implication of the usage of tricolor for Cricket is that the tricolor still holds relevance in representing the country of Afghanistan, if not domestically, abroad. BasilLeaf (talk) 05:46, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • A per previous users, until the Taliban a) are overthrown again b) start using another national flag. Psychloppos (talk) 08:02, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    A no argument needed. Noorullah21 (talk) 19:34, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • A. Nothing to discuss. Super Ψ Dro 10:26, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • C, per BasilLeaf and for the sake of maintaining NPOV. The Islamic Empirate of Afghanistan is the government of Afghanistan now, but the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan's flag is still flown at some recent sporting events and still holds relevance for representing the country. I believe there is a merit to having both flags and that both flags need to be in the Infobox. Rexh17 (talk) 22:25, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • A per BSMRD; disagree with BasilLeaf that cricket/sporting or even international recognition meet the standard to leave off the IEA given that it is the sole government in control of Afg. by various sources WittyWidi (talk) 14:43, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • A Per @BSMRD: Ytpks896 (talk) 21:46, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • C The flag of the Islamic Emirate is not recognised, now used to represent Afghanistan anywhere internationally - from sporting events to embassies. Afghan embassies and diplomatic offices still fly the flag of the Islamic Republic. But the Emirate controls the country and is the de facto government, we cannot dismiss that as well. So, maintaining a neutrality, I think it's best to show both, since one is used domestically, and the other internationally.. Most notably, the Afghan Cricket Board's office has both the flags, as per last time I saw in a press conference. I agree fully with the argument of Luxic
  • Either A or C because

A. The Taliban have been in control of the Afghanistan since 15 Aug 2021 and until the Taliban is finally overthrown again we can keep it. C. The Taliban has de facto control, the Islamic Republic de jure. And the Islamic Republic is still recognised by the world as the sole legitimate government of Afghanistan. So, both of them get a flag. Old!!man1234561234 (talk) 08:45, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Old!!man1234561234:, would you mind 'moving' your A/C vote into the 'survey' section? GoodDay (talk) 07:56, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We have reasons for all Old!!man1234561234 (talk) 08:52, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • This RFC is flawed as written. Because the question narrowly focusses on the flag, to the exclusion of other aspects such as the name, A and D are the only conclusions that make any sense. The alternatives require that we represent the tricolour as the flag of the Islamic Emirate (which it clearly isn't). I don't accept that limiting the discussion in this way is appropriate. The question is, or should be, whether this article should accept as uncontroversial fact that the Taliban are the government of Afghanistan, a POV that is rejected by every government on the planet. Kahastok talk 21:46, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • B There is no evidence that the Taliban have adopted their flag as the national flag of Afghanistan. Furthermore, per weight, articles are supposed to reflect reliable sources, which all continue to use the flag of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. Envoys of the Islamic Republic continue to represent Afghanistan and continue to use the Islamic Republic's flag. TFD (talk) 01:19, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Various reliable sources indicate three things: 1) the IEA is in control of Afghanistan; 2) the IEA uses the white field with the black shahada as their flag, with continuity from their previous regime, which they see the current regime as a restoration of; and 3) that said flag is in use in Afghanistan and reflects the ground reality in the country. Over at Flag of Afghanistan I think we can take a more nuanced approach to this, using both the IEA and IRA flags as the IRA still has diplomatic recognition worldwide, but the infobox on a country page should reflect the reality in the country, and the reality is that the Islamic Republic is no more, and that the flag of the Islamic Emirate is the flag of Afghanistan. WittyWidi (talk) 17:07, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • That's original research. We need reliable sources that say it is the flag of Afghanistan. Reality is whatever reliable sources say it is. TFD (talk) 09:35, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • Countries don't have flags, their regimes do. Often they are one and the same, but in Afghanistan's case they are not. Moreover reliable sources (refs 1 and 2 here say that the flag of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan is the black shahada on the white flag. Reliable sources say that the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan is the regime of Afghanistan. Yes, to an extent it is WP:SYNTH, but this is unavoidable in this case, and I'd argue it's not egregious enough to constitute WP:OR; with that said, the alternative, which you backed, is substantially flimsier in that there may be the verifiable connection between flag and regime, but the substantially more important verifiable connection between the Islamic Republic and the current regime of Afghanistan is missing. WittyWidi (talk) 18:20, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • B. As UNO member website page is still showing tricolour flag.Ameen Akbar (talk) 07:23, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • B The Taliban are not recognized by any government in the world let alone the UN so there is no need for their flag to be displayed in the infobox. Also, i don't think the Taliban have ever announced the change of the flag to the public, not to mention the Afghan cricket team recently used the tri-colour flag in their recent cricket tournament. Akmal94 (talk) 21:41, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just because they are not recognized does not mean the flag shouldn't be displayed, that makes no sense. The Taliban literally have it hoistered as their official flag, the Afghan cricket team using the tri-colour flag is another issue and is moving toward whataboutery Noorullah21 (talk) 03:31, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thats assumption, the Taliban haven't officially announced the change of the flag like they have announced other things publicly. Even so, the flag at the UN charter is still the tri-color flag. But we need to bring a reliable source that shows they changed it. We can't assume they changed it without a source. Akmal94 (talk) 22:55, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What @Akmal94 said, they haven't stated a flag change whatsoever and the official flag is the white background with the shahadah. This is pure common sense on itself. Noorullah21 (talk) 02:41, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're not understanding what i am saying, the white flag is not the official flag because the Taliban haven't announced that it is. So its pure speculation and we can't assume on speculation alone. We need a reliable source that states they changed it. In the mean time, it would be better if they use the old flag in the infobox. Akmal94 (talk) 04:40, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

  • Comment Llewee you might want to change emblem to flag in Option A for clarity's sake as the Emblem and Flag of the Taliban are two separate things. BSMRD (talk) 17:58, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Done :)
  • Comment This RfC could affect / be affected by an ongoing RfC at Flag of Afghanistan. Should this discussion wait for that one to conclude? It'd be quite a mess if the flag article and the country article discuss the same issue at the same time but come to different conclusions.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 20:56, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are there any sources that the Taliban have adopted their flag as the flag of Afghanistan? What reliable sources are showing this flag as the Afghani flag? TFD (talk) 03:55, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    That's original synthesis. We need a source that states that the flag is the flag of the current regime. Kahastok talk 19:15, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Which is unattainable. We shouldn't be beholden to the Taliban explicitly overriding the tricolour when they never considered the tricolour to be legitimate to begin with. Synth it is, but synth is unavoidable in this case, unless we want to avoid the issue entirely by holding the bar of verifiability much too high. At the end it's not a perfect solution to use the shahada flag, but it's better than the alternatives which are to either fail to publish notable and reasonably verifiable, with minimal synth to the extent it's not really OR, or to publish downright untrue/unverifiable information (i.e. hold the Islamic Republic as current in the infobox in the face of contradictory sources that it no longer exists). In general, not from a strictly encyclopedic POV but from a more semantic POV, I don't get the fascination on this talk page with wanting the Taliban to publish a statement saying that "Yes, in fact, this is now the flag of Afghanistan" when the fact that they never considered the tricolour and the regime flying it legitimate makes it exceedingly clear to a reasonable person that the chances of them doing so are next to none. WittyWidi (talk) 18:31, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think anyone has said that the source has to be the Taliban. Just, a reliable source saying what you propose that we say, that the black-on-white flag is the current flag of Afghanistan. And if there is genuinely no reliable source on the entire planet that makes this claim then we have absolutely no business in trying to get there first. Kahastok talk 18:39, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note It appears the embassies which are still flying the tricolour aren't under the control of the current Taliban government.[1]--Llewee (talk) 13:48, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps a note that several international orgs/embassies still use the tricolor could be good, rather than just putting both flags next to each other as if they were coequal? Side note, who is staffing these embassies? It's not like there is a government to pay them. BSMRD (talk) 13:54, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It appears from the source that their being funded through payments for consular assistance. It seems a bit dubious to me to even describe them as national embassies any more as they don't seem to be linked to any wider diplomatic structure.--Llewee (talk) 15:59, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Indian border claim

Due to the Kashmir Dispute, India does claim a border on the south east, though the border is not administered by India. I would suggest adding a note where it says that Afghanistan shares a border with Pakistan about India claiming a border. Chxeese (talk) 00:45, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Good point, I've made the modification. BasilLeaf (talk) 06:15, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Formation box for Afghan Dynasties, etc.

I was wondering, since that we have added the lodis, of course since they were also regarded as The AFGHAN EMPIRE, we should add other pashtun/afghan dynasties in the formation box perhaps?

Atleast the ones that have centered closeby, including india, this would include dynasties perhaps including the Khilji dynasty Sur Empire Malwa Sultanate, etc. Let me know of your thoughts and opinions below.

@Kansas Bear (inviting you to ask what you think about this)

Anybody else feel free to reply. Noorullah21 (talk) 04:22, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally the box should be as short as possible, holding only the key event(s) that created the current state. CMD (talk) 06:42, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I believe having the Khiljis and Lodis would be probable to keep then, since they both contributed to it through different events, the Sur dynasty is debateable. Noorullah21 (talk) 16:02, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Afghanistan is located in Central Asia

Afghanistan is not in South Asia. It’s in the Heart of Central Asia. If you take a class at UCLA or use accurate sources, it is considered Central Asian. Not sure why it says South Asian. It’s inaccurate and needs to be updated. Afghanistan also does not share any culture with the South Asian region. It shares a Persian language with Iran and Tajikistan and was once apart of the Persian Empire? Shabnamabiii (talk) 08:09, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article already says that Afghanistan "is a landlocked country at the crossroads of Central and South Asia" which is accurate. Afghanistan is frequently included in lists of countries in both regions.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 20:57, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It’s not accurate. None of the regions in Afghanistan are in South Asia so it shouldn’t be on lists, and actual credible sources like universities and scholarly articles only consider it Central Asia. That’s all. Shabnamabiii (talk) 01:19, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may have to discuss this at South Asia then, because that article has no shortage of sources in it justifying Afghanistan being described as a South Asian country.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 20:08, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]