Talk:Pashtuns/Archive 11

Refs[edit]

This article should probably use the {{cite web}} and {{cite book}} templates for references. I'll try to update some of them. Khoi khoi 03:01, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes, I already started with that, but not using the templates you listed! Oh man. It takes forever as is. I was just making them consistent and similar to the Azeris, but man. Tombseye 08:23, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone may be interested in this citable reference which argues for Jewish origin based on numerous observable customs. To say the matter of origins is settled by any single type of evidence makes no sense when they are so contradictory. I am not advocating a position, only making available an "off the beaten track" resource. On the web I could find it only in an odd location, http://www.moshiach.com/features/tribes/pakistan.php but they seem to be the only folks who have translated the original Japanese into English.Leo Schlosberg 04:52, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PLZ don´t use pictures of other sites where some of this pictures are showing as well under the title Tajik family!! otherwise we will close the room. Thanks

Very nice pictures indeed. But, beside the boy with the Pashtun traditional hat, how do you know their ethnicity is Pashtun? Pashtuns of Afghanistan and Tajiks of Afghanistan can often look the same. Especially since these pictures are from Kabul where Tajiks are the largest group and Pashtuns are a minority there (2nd largest group). If they were from a largely Pashtun area like Khowst or Kandahar then we could say they are most likely Pashtun anyway. But in this case, whats there to suggest that (besides the boy with the traditional Pashtun hat) they are Pashtuns? Is there by chance a description from the source? Behnam 07:31, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, for the first image click here, and scroll down to the bottom. For the others, click here, and then on the right bar enter the word "Pashtun" in the "Search Images" field. You'll see the three others there, all you have to do is click on them and they will pop-up, giving the description. Khoi khoi 15:27, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I see, thanks. But from my personal experience, seeing thousands and thousands of faces, I highly doubt the two on the left are Pashtun. How did the US military determine their ethnicity? Did they actually ask them? Or did they just assume that these were Pashtuns? I personally think the latter was the case. In a place like Kabul you can't just guess people's ethnicity without asking, unless they were signature clothing (like that hat or those turbans). Especially with the family picture. But I guess since in Wiki its the rule where personal knowledge is not taken over a source, they cannot be removed, unless another reliable picture is found. Behnam 04:00, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, but the family look Pashtun to me. I saw lots of people like them in Peshawar and I knew a family that was very similar to them back in California (they were Afghan refugees and lived in Alameda and some of them still might be there). 5 brothers and 2 sisters. How do you tell faces apart in Afghanistan? Except for the Hazara (and even with them it varies) I'm not sure there are any huge differences between the various groups. Tombseye 04:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Typical Sindhi hat is on that boy. I don't know who else(Group) worn such caps in Kabul, or that must be some of his relatives in Sindh etc would have sent that traditional stuff. A Pashtun boy would looks more glorious in his own traditional dress rather than others esp when we have been buzy to find out some good images regarding Pashtuns. That boy is not a celebrity like Ghulam Ishaq Khan or others, easy to recognise whatever is on, but here boy is just a common passerby so how can we(a reader, newcomer, contributor etc) recognize him as Pashtun? Haider 21:42, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Haider. The problem is that we are having copyright problem with the pictures. We can't use Ishaq Khan UNLESS you or someone else can find pictures that we can use without violating copyright laws. Also, you make a good point about the boy as he is wearing a Sindhi cap which is not common in Afghanistan and is not a typically Pashtun hat. I like the picture just because it's a typical Pashtun (which is good for an article like this), but I wanted a group picture at the top. I hope we can find one to use sometime. Tombseye 01:50, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually that hat is VERY common in Southern and Eastern parts of Afghanistan. Epsecially Kandahar, Khowst, and Helmand and those areas. Though it might originally be a Sindhi hat that Pashtuns of that region adopted somehow. Behnam 01:59, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And yeah Tombseye is right. They have really gotten strict on the image liscenses. They won't even accept Creative Commons Lisecence without permission for Comercial use. That's just ridiciouls. I had several really good images deleted because of that. They were CC2.0, but no Commercial use. And also you if you use CC images they have to allow Derivate Works also. So now its alot harder finding images. They have also gotten strict on fair use. Oh well, we'll have to live with it. Behnam 02:06, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tomb, if copyright (which is without any doubt a geniune one) is the case then I should keep myself buzy to find out right one aswell. I still can remember an image in which some Pashtun boys from Kohistan were on their way to school, desperate to see that one. Take care. Haider 09:48, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, if you guys or anyone can find pictures without copyright problems, by all means let me or Khoi khoi know. The Kohistani boys picture was good, but there was no ID as to whether they were Pashtuns or not, but they might have been. Tombseye 01:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please show us which Kohistani picture you're talking about? Behnam 07:38, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Almost a year gone when an image of Pashtuns from Kohistan was there, the beauty of that image was Pashtun kids were going to school, otherwise they usually affixed even children with AK-47!! Tomb, what is the criteria to confirm wether they are pashtuns or not, certainly not military forces deployed? Manana and Take care. Haider 09:42, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haider, is this the image you're talking about? Khoi khoi 09:47, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Khoikhoi, I couldn't find that one but great to see Pashtun children buying sweets at a shop(looks like), believe me that will work rather than that sindhi hat. Good work. Take care! Haider 10:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think there were copyright problems with that picture too AND the caption reads that they are Kohistani and Pashtun children and is not clear if they are simply Pashtun Kohistanis or Kohistani and Pashtun kids. If the copyright issues could be resolved I have no problem with a lot of pictures. I like the Pashtun boy we have at the top, but not in the place as a group picture would be better to signify the Pashtuns as a whole (as we used in Azeris. Tombseye 17:50, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Tombseye, Copyright problems are much enough to prevent us to add that image, that's all. Haider 19:52, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last time I checked, there weren't any objections from anybody about removing the image of the (allegedly) Pashtun boy. The main issue was about the family. Did something change? Khoi khoi 01:51, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Khoikhoi, I have asked for removing the image just for it's technical reason, for any pashtun celeb like Imran Khan etc, it's easy to be recognized nevertheless if they are wearing jeans or shalwar suit but how could we recongnized a boy, a common passerby with sindhi hat on him, for any wikipedians the first impression would go straight for a sindhi boy on Pashtun page. If we don't have any suitable image available right now due to copyright, we must wait for a while, it dosn't mean to affix unsuitable photos. I would appreciate you always for your hard work regarding images. Manana and Take care. Haider 09:38, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I personally think that boy doesn't even look very Pashtun. It's not 100% known if he is Pashtun, and regardless on Wikipedia we're supposed to put forward the best informative material out there and prevent misconceptions. Giving people the wrong impression on Pashtuns won't help anyone. The pictures with Ahmad Shah Durrani and other Pashtuns in the past were better.

That is NOT a Sindhi boy! There are no Sindhis in Afghanistan, and Kabul of all places. That hat is very commonly worn by Pashtun young boys, even older men wear them. If you are from Afghanistan you should know that. It is especially worn by Pashtun boys (and sometimes grown men) in Helmand and Kandahar. Behnam 15:12, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's very important question, just tell me honestly, is that a traditional/cultural Pashtuns cap, despite if that worn esp by children? I have never seen any such cap in NWFP even FATA and PATA on pashtuns heads. Thanks. Haider 09:33, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you're right that it is not worn by Pakistani Pashtuns in NWFP. But in Helmand, Kandahar, and sometimes Quetta it is very common. Especially in Kandahar and Helmand, almost all young boys wear it and adults often wear it too. Just take a look at some casual videos or pictures from Kandahar and Helmand. The boy in this pictures is most likely a Hotaki Pashtun from Kandahar. How do I know that? I have a friend that looks just like him, except older. Behnam 15:38, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't get my answer, which was very simple like, is that Pashtuns traditional/cultural cap or not? You know very well that what should we accepted as our cultural dress from toe to head (very famous). Kindly don't take caps from other non-pashtuns, while we have already a rich history regarding caps aswell. If pashtun Hotaki boy had his own cultural cap then that would have been a great "image" otherwise this is like a sindhi boy on pashtun page. Thanks. Haider 20:50, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A freind of mine from Balochistan is from Achakzai tribe, usually he wore such caps but believe me, he has never accepted that "styled" cap as Pashtuns cap but just for the change of style thats all. Take care Haider 20:55, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll delete the image as there appears to be some issue with its origins. Having personally been to Peshawar and other Pashtun areas I didn't see many locals wearing this cap, but saw plenty of Sindhis wearing them in Karachi so obviously it's peculiar to that area. Tombseye 21:36, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This hat has its origins in Sindh, but is VERY commonly worn in Kandahar, Helman and sometimes Oruzgan. There are no Sindhis in Kabul. The boy is not Sindhi. He can only be Pashtun. Behnam 23:19, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I understand here. You objected to the family because it was misleading (I'm still not sure why), but don't think it's misleading for a boy to wear a Sindhi cap? Shouldn't we either use both pictures or neither since they are both ambiguous and from the same source? Tombseye 03:25, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Categories[edit]

There must be more categories that apply to this article: can someone pls sort through categories and get necessary cats added? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Khoi khoi put all of the relevant categories in the Pashtun category thus eliminating the need to insert stuff into what was a burgeoning section. Tombseye 16:41, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FAC[edit]

I don't see the information with native spellings. It should not be removed from the article completely, although I strongly suggest it be removed from FAs for readability. However, other editors have made arguments for providing this information in Wikipedia articles, as it makes it easier for users who are not fluent in another language to search for the information in its native tongue, and generally enhances the ability of other editors to verify information. I don't think this goes against particular arguments for "Wikipedia is not for your convenience," as other encyclopedias do this in various ways. It simply shouldn't be done in a way that makes the introductory sentence unreadable. Can it be added to the top of the infobox, or somewhere else? Is it already somewhere else? KP Botany 03:28, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I've moved the native spellings down to the footnotes. Khoi khoi 07:04, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That seems to handle the issue well, it's where folks looking for the information might seek it in the first place. KP Botany 02:39, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Iranian plateau[edit]

This reference is to "an informal online resource for summit-focused hikers, climbers, and mountain lovers" not a geological site, and as such is problematic when used as a reference to define a geological area, which is what the article on the Iranian plateau is about, as geologists define areas by their geological history. I did just change the Iranian plateau article, as it had many problems, starting with its opening sentence that "The Iranian plateau is a major geologic formation" as it is not a geological formation but rather techtonostrigraphic terranes, which are probably made up of geological formations or lithostratigraphic sections. Even the definition of the plateau given in the article doesn't agree with the image at peekbaggers, because the definition includes Tajikistan, while the map at peekbaggers does not. Peekbaggers's map might be found elsewhere on a geological site that includes the Main Zagros Thrust and Makran tranfer zone. I don't know, without extensive research, whether or not the Iranian plateau is today considered to be the region north of both of these or only the region north of the MZT, west of the Strait of Hormuz. Iran has an extensive history of research in the geological sciences, so maybe there's an Iranian Wikipedia editor who can help with this--you might start by looking up Iranian plateau and Zagros thrust on the Iranian wikipedia to find some help. But, the peekbaggers' map cannot be used as a reference to define a geological region, when the site itself proclaims it is not intended as such. KP Botany 03:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added two references, one from Britannica and one from the University of Texas that clarify the matter. Hope that helps. Tombseye 03:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images -- for what it's worth.[edit]

I asked my cousin, an ethnographer (she's Pashtun, and highly respected in all Afghan ethnic communities in the US and in Afghanistan, Germany and England), about the one image of the Pashtun family, she said, "yes, they are Pashtuns." I will ask her and other family about the other images, next time I go to dinner, printing out the photos--making sure they are looked at by a variety of Pashtuns and other Afghans. I don't agree with Wikipedia's general policy on images, as it is rather slack on original research--whether or not any of us can look at any pictures and say they are Pashtun. However, if an image is to be used from the Air Force pictures, it should be the most culturally relevant one, meaning, a picture of a Pashtun family. If there are reasons for using pictures of solitary Pashtuns rather than an image of a Pashtun family, please present them, as I would adore an excuse for 30 5 seconds of solitude the next time I spend a week or two with Pashtuns. KP Botany 19:38, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree a nice culturally one is deff appropriate. Lakers 01:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pathans partly descended from Greeks Proof[edit]

Some new Genetic studies have found Pathans are descended from Ancient Greeks Links-

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007%5C02%5C09%5Cstory_9-2-2007_pg12_8

http://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/Display_news.asp?section=World_News&subsection=Pakistan+%26+Sub-Continent&month=February2007&file=World_News20070210221759.xml

Please add this to article

Shtup 17:40, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tanoli Pashtuns?[edit]

I know this issue has been discussed before, but does any one know if they are a branch of the Yusufzai? A Tanoli user claims to be Barlas Mughal and then a Pashtun the next day. I need to try and sort this mess out!--Alcides 12:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tanolis do not belong to yousafzais tribal group, but it dosn't mean, that they are not Pashtun tribe, they have their language Pashto in the western outskirts of Hazara Division and Mardan, another singnificant point about them is strictness on Pashtunwali. Yes they are Pashtuns by their heritage, culture and traditions. Take care. Haider 21:16, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We have already been discussing this issue for months and if you are interested to view those debates, you will be highly appreciated to visit Talk Pashtun Archives. Thanks. Haider 21:23, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reference to Pakistan administered Kashmir[edit]

The reference to Pakistan administered Kashmir is given as Azad Kashmir. For the information of all the editors, Azad Kashmir is a term given by Pakistan and Pakistan occupied Kashmir given by India. the world in general knows the area occupied by Kashmir as "Pakistan Administered Kashmir". Hence, I undoing the reverts done by another editor. Kindly keep the content neutral. the term "Azad Kashmir" is unknown and not recogised by the world outside Pakistan. (rams81 05:26, 12 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Azad Kashmir and Pakistan-administered Kashmir are not the same things, however. According to the article, Pakistan-administered Kashmir includes not only Azad Kashmir, but also the Northern Areas, in addition to Raskam and the Shaksgam Valley. Khoi khoi 05:36, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But, the article anyway mentions Northern Areas. If this article is to serve any purpose for world oustide the South Asia, we need to mention the terms world is familiar with. I think you (Khoikhoi) a knowledgeble person w.r.t to the geography of the region. So, you may modify it such that it covers the regions appropriately (rams81 05:41, 12 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Alright, I'll ask another user, Tombseye, to give his opinion on the matter. I figured that Azad Kashmir is better because it is the official term for the region. But I will look more into the matter, and get back to you. Regards, Khoi khoi 05:48, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, I removed the reference of Northern Areas, since as said by you Northern Areas is part of Azad KAshmir / Pakistan administered Kashmir. So, the article now just states Pakistan Administered Kashmir. Regarding the offical status of name Azad Kashmir, it is recognised only in Pakistan. Anyway let us see the opinion of the user Tombseye(rams81 05:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Actually, reference books call the area the Northern Areas and Azad Kashmir so that's how we have to keep it. See here on Britannica. As far as I know the world just views the line of control as "recognized" while India and Pakistan make counter claims which aren't what we're dealing with here. Tombseye 00:04, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, note CIA factbook which simply refers to the areas. Otherwise, we have to re-write the Jammu and Kashmir article as Indian-administered Kashmir which is probably not what people want to see. Hope this clears things up. Tombseye 00:13, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Azad Kashmir is the official name of the region, which is the safest thing to use in the article. deeptrivia (talk) 01:32, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]