Talk:Pashtuns: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Tombseye (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 259: Line 259:
==Demographics mistakes==
==Demographics mistakes==
I looked at some of the demographics figures and they do not make any sense. The figures denote non-Pashto-speakers in India and Bangladesh (I've only found references to a small refugee group of between 40 and 60,000 living in India and nothing for Bangladesh) as the reference claims that they speak Urdu. Ethnologue, at least, claims to count only language demographic figures. These inflated numbers seem out of place and are another reason why this article has declined in quality since I nominated it for Featured Article status. We need to keep in mind that we cannot simply insert whatever we feel like and must take not of professional encyclopedias and how they approach this and other topics. Regardless, the demographics information will have to be changed.[[User:Tombseye|Tombseye]] 06:30, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
I looked at some of the demographics figures and they do not make any sense. The figures denote non-Pashto-speakers in India and Bangladesh (I've only found references to a small refugee group of between 40 and 60,000 living in India and nothing for Bangladesh) as the reference claims that they speak Urdu. Ethnologue, at least, claims to count only language demographic figures. These inflated numbers seem out of place and are another reason why this article has declined in quality since I nominated it for Featured Article status. We need to keep in mind that we cannot simply insert whatever we feel like and must take not of professional encyclopedias and how they approach this and other topics. Regardless, the demographics information will have to be changed.[[User:Tombseye|Tombseye]] 06:30, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
:Tombseye, thanks for bringing this up. I'm not tto sure about the populations of Pashtuns in other countries but as for India, the currents source states 776,000 Pashto-speaking Pashtuns out of 11,703,000 total. Could you please give the source that discusses the refugees? I hope this helps. With regards, [[User:Anupam|Anupam]]<sup>[[User talk:Anupam|Talk]]</sup> 06:47, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 06:47, 28 December 2006

Pashtun Unassessed
Pashtuns is part of WikiProject Pashtun, a project to maintain and expand Pashtun-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
WikiProject iconEthnic groups A‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
AThis article has been rated as A-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:

Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks:

Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

Template:FormerFA2
Template:V0.5
WikiProject iconCentral Asia Unassessed
WikiProject iconPashtuns is part of WikiProject Central Asia, a project to improve all Central Asia-related articles. This includes but is not limited to Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Tibet, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Xinjiang and Central Asian portions of Iran, Pakistan and Russia, region-specific topics, and anything else related to Central Asia. If you would like to help improve this and other Central Asia-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconPakistan Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconIndia A‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
AThis article has been rated as A-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Archive
Archives

ATTENTION!!! There are 2 Pashtun articles. Pashtuns and Pashtun people

There are 2 Pashtun articles. Pashtuns and Pashtun people

I don't know how this happened, but this needs to be fixed immediatly or it will cause major problems! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tajik-afghan (talkcontribs) 07:10, 22 October 2006.

Thanks, I've fixed it now. —Khoikhoi 18:18, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. But, Sorry for asking, but just to be sure, did you add the changes from the Pashtuns article to the Pashtun people article. Because I remember a few people made some changes to the Pashtuns article. --Parsiwan 17:30, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The only changes were this (which was also made here), this, and this (which was also made here as well). Khoikhoi 03:55, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Great! Nice work. Thank you. Issue solved. Parsiwan 07:22, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WHERE IS SQUASH? PASHTUNS RULED THE WOLRD IN THIS SPORT

WHO IS RUNNING THIS ARTICLE?

Why are there Hindustani actors on this article? Why aren't their Pakhtun celeberteis why these Bollywood "Pathans" are on the Pashtun page? What do they have to do with us? Who is Sharukh Khan Fardeen Khan Chengez Khan ? They are Pashtun based on WHAT? Who is running this article now Parsiwans and Indians? Take this garbage off and put some real Pashtuns like Bacha Khan Achkazai Ghani Khan Shinwari Baba Khyal Mohammad Sardar Ali Nashenas real Pakhtuns take these fake Hindustanis OUT!!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sync2k5 (talkcontribs) 08:57, 5 November 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I am Pashtun from Kandahar, Afghanistan, and I am the one who added Indian celebrities to Pashtuns article because they are Pashtuns by blood. This is not about who you like or who you don't like. It's about who is Pashtun and who isn't. You may add all the Pashtuns of the world but you must not delete people who you might not like. Sharukh Khan, Salman Khan, Amir Khan, Fardeen Khan, Feroz Khan and many other Khans are all Pashtuns from their father's side. In fact, they are all "Afghans", which is the name their ancestors called themselves. If my son is born in USA...does that make him no longer Pashtun? will my son be considered a white American? The fact is that everyone who knows those Indian movie actors also know that they are Afghans. Pashtuns, Pathans, Afghans are all the same people, it depends what name you call yourself.

The word or name "Afghanistan" appeared in the memoirs of Emperor Babur, Dated: 1525 A.D. "...In the country of Kābul there are many and various tribes. Its valleys and plains are inhabited by Tūrks, Aimāks, and Arabs. In the city and the greater part of the villages, the population consists of Tājiks (Sarts). Many other of the villages and districts are occupied by Pashāis, Parāchis, Tājiks, Berekis, and Afghans. In the hill-country to the west, reside the Hazāras and Nukderis. Among the Hazāra and Nukderi tribes, there are some who speak the Moghul language. In the hill-country to the north-east lies Kaferistān, such as Kattor and Gebrek. To the south is Afghanistān. There are eleven or twelve different languages spoken in Kābul: Arabic, Persian, Tūrki, Moghuli, Hindi, Afghani, Pashāi, Parāchi, Geberi, Bereki, and Lamghāni. ..." [1]

That explains that in the past (at least in 1500s and onwards) Pashtuns were called "Afghans"...the area in which Pashtuns lived was called "Afghanistan" and the language they spoke was called "Afghani". User:NisarKand November 5, 2006

Blood is irrelevent to the matters of Pashtuns. There is no evidence that Pashtun decent from one single common ancestor. If you were to believe the lingage of Qais, then according to that Sajra Durranis, and all other Afghan tribes are Afghans while the hill tribes are of Pakhtun stock. The Karlanris can not be linked with the rest of Qais sons, therefore the Karlanris are the original Pakhtuns while the later, sons of prince Afghana are Jews or bani-Israeli. Bring me the Sajra-i-Afghan and I can prove it to you. It is in the articles of the Afghan Chronicles that Karlnaris are adopted, hence are not of the same stock. ----The reason why I am bring this up is to you prove to you from your own sources that Pakhtuns can not be labeled just by blood. By blood they can be from any forefather. Pakhtuns or ethnic Afghans are distinguished by their cultural treats. Dilip Kumar, Sharukh Khan, Amir Khan, Fardeen Khan, Salman Khan practice the lifestyle of Hindustanis, therefore they are Hindustanis and not Pashtuns,Pathans, or Afghans. If your son is born in America, and he speaks the language of the white man, he lives according to the standards of the white man, and he is provide to be A WHITE MAN, then he is a white man. Pakhtun/Afghan are an ethno-linguist group, they are not a RACE, RACE is a falwed concept. It's not about liking or dislinking, its about facts. All Hindustani "Pathans" don't speak, practice, or live by Pakhto or Pakhtunwali. They do not recongize Afghanyat, hence they are of Hindustani origins. I have met Dilip Kumar and there is nothing Afghan/Pakhtun about him, nor does he cares. Sharukh Khan, Saif Ali Khan, Amir Khan, Ferdan Khan and all these other Khans are not proven Pathan/Afghans/Pakhtuns neither by blood, language, heritage, or culture. It is you who like them to be Afghans and Pakhtuns because they have the name KHAN. Sharukh Khan is a Hindkowal, so is Dilip Kumar, the father of Saif Ali Khan is a Nawab some claim to be Moghul, Ferdan Khan father might speak KOCHAAA and LOYE SHAY in hindi movies but that doesn't make him an Afghan or Pakhtun. I suggest you look up ETHNICITY before you asscoiate Bollywood stars with a qoom that has nothing to do with them. They might share our genetics, but they do not represent us or have a common goal with us. They are HINDUSTANI. If there are those who are Pakistani, then they are PAKISTANI, and if there are those who are AFGHANISTANI, then they are AFGHANISTANI. These people are repsetives of these nations, not of the ethnicity Afghan or Pakhtun. However if you want them up there fine but how come not a single real Pakhtun celebrity or someone like Bacha Khan is not up there? Why these servants of other nations are being flaunted on a page about Pashtuns who can't even speak or pronounce PAKHTUN OR PAKHTO without coughing??? Sync2k5 04:20, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with NisarKand. I even took the liberty to provide reference to prove that Shah Rukh Khan and Dilip Kumar (Yusuf Khan) are Pashtuns. Please read the following Sync2k5: Shah Rukh, Dilip Kumar invited to Pakistan and Dr. S. Amjad Hussain. According to another reference, Pushtan, Southern of India, there are 11,703,000 Pashtuns in India, 776,000 of them speaking Pashto and Hindko. Including images of Pashtuns from the three major countries (Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India) where they are found gives Pashtuns from these areas representation in the article. Thanks for sharing your knowledge NisarKand. It is very much appreciated. I hope this helps. --AnupamTalk 18:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the creator of this discussion. There should be pictures of people who are important to Pashtun identity. I don't see the importance of Bollywood actors to Pashtun identity, unless their movies have something to do with Pashtun identity or they promote Pashtun identity. I don't know much about these actors, but they should have something to do with Pashtun identity/language/culture. Parsiwan 05:37, 6

November 2006 (UTC)

I am totally confused with User:Sync2k5's statements...not making any sense to me. I assume what User:Sync2k5 is trying to say is that Pashtuns living in Pakistan should no longer be considered Pashtuns because they adopted a new country, new language (Urdu) and new way of life (Pakistani lifestyle). Well, I am not going to argue over these issues...have it his or her's way. I strongly believe that Pashtuns are recognized by their blood and not by their language or lifestyle. We can't refuse someone's ethnic background simply because they adopted a new language or new way of lifestyle.

I am Pashtun and I don't think I need to listen to or read from NON-pashtuns what they say or write about us. Because most NON-pashtuns are totally clueless about Pashtuns. As you can see this other person by the name of User:Tajik-afghan|Parsiwan, who is obviously NON-pashtun, stateting that he doesn't see importance of Bollywood actors. First of all...being a Bollywood actor is a profession or a job title...not a lifestyle. We all know that movies are unreal and fake, especially Bollywood movies. It's a form of entertainment for others. And even if we were to some how include or use the Bollywood movie lifestyle with Pashtun lifestyle...it's pretty much the same, except for the language and religion, although in many Bollywood movies Islam does exist. You have to be Pashtun and someone who watched lots of Bollywood movies to know this. Question: How many Pashtuns could there be in the world who don't watch or enjoy Bollywood movies? or who don't know about Sharukh Khan and others?

If we decide and say Sharukh Khan and others are not Pashtuns and they don't belong in Pashtun article...then in which Ethnic groups will they be included? will Hindus write about Sharukh Khan being a Hindu by Ethnics in their article? I don't think they will, because they will determine and say he is not Hindu by Ethnics...therfore, doesn't belong in their Hindu article. I just want to make it clear and easy for everyone....anyone who's parents were Pashtuns should be included in this article, especially their father's side and regardless of where on earth they live, what work they do or what language they now speak. We need to focus on all types of Pashtuns and explain about them. I also want to add image of Mirwais Ahmadzai, who was born in France to an Afghan father and an Italian mother. This makes him Ethnically Pashtun and I'm sure he thinks the same way, although his heritage is of Pashtun and Italian both. In America...the Americans usually call themselves Irish-Americans, Afro-Americans, Scottish-Americans, English-Americans, Italian-Americans, Greek-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, Afghan-Americans and etc., even if their ancestors settled in USA 100s of years ago and intermarried with other different Ethnic groups...they still represent or use their true heritage by placing it before the word "American". This practice is very common in America.

Now we go to Pakistan...if an Afghan is born in Pakistan, they are still citizen and native of Afghanistan...that's Pakistan's law we are dealing with. So let's assume Sharukh Khan's father was Afghan refugee but Sharukh was born in Pakistan and now his son was also born in Pakistan later...that would mean Sharukh Khan's father, Sharukh Khan and his son are all Afghans, even if they were to speak 100% Urdu and live the Pakistani lifestyle. You see you all the confusion?

Besides all this argument...there are nearly 2 billion people in the world who watch Bollywood movies and know the actors as Pashtuns, Pathans or Afghans...and it's going to be very difficult to convince these 2 billion people to say or claim Sharukh Khan and others are not Pashtuns, Pathans or Afghans. User:NisarKand November 7, 2006

You dont understand because you are ignorant to the fact that Pashtuns are not only a race but also an ethno-linguist group. Those people who might have the Pashtun genetic makeup but speak different languages are loyal to those cultures, languages, and hertiages of which they currently are. They do not represent the Pashtun culture, soceity, heritage or language. These people are advocates of their birth nations and MOTHER TONGUES that could be Urdu, Hindi, Farsi etc. By blood we are all connected, what defines us as ethnicity is our cultural differences, our heritages. This is why a Pashtun is one that does Pashto. Agha Pakhtun da che Pakhto kre! Che sook Pakhto nashwahal agha Pakhtun sengy sho? Your logic is stupid! Black Americans do not relate to Africa, they don't bother with Blacks of Africa nor do they care about their problems, nor do they care about their culture, nor do they care about their heritage, speak their languages or practice their religion. They are Black of who can trace their roots to Africa but thats it. There is nothing African about them but their skin color. They are not ethnic Africans. The same applies to all Americans whos ancestors might have come and settled from different parts of the world but today they are Americans and their primary concern is America. When the accomplish something, it will be an accomplishment of America, not of Germany, Ireland, England, or Africa. The same way these non-Pashto speaking Pathans, when they accomplish something the credit goes to their birth nations, their mother tongues, and the community the represent. Your argument that we can't convince people that these people are non-Pashtuns is also absurd. Truth, facts can not scumb to the ignorance of the massses. Also Hinduism is a religion not an ethnic group, so get your own confusion fixed first. Hinduism can be practice by any ethnic group. To say that Hindus of any background will not acccept Sharukh Khan as their own is redicolous and laughible. First of all Sharukh Khan is not the one druming the drum of Afghanyat, Pashtunyat. It is the illiterate and ignorant people amongst Pashtuns and Afghans who are bent upon making him one. Show me one article where Sharukh Khan as declared his love for Pashto, Afghanyat, or in fact Islam? He is very much loved by Hindustanis and Indians. His wife is Hindu/Sikh, his children follow the faith for their mother, his traditions are screwed up to begin with. THERE IS NOTHING AFGHAN, PASHTUN, ABOUT THESE PEOPLE! Just becuse some people wish them to be their AFGHAN idols, doesn't really make them to be. Remove these pathetic pictures of fake icons! Put real Pakhtuns up there. Where is the original author of this article..what happend to mr. tomsday something...???? Sync2k5 08:34, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was not refering to Hindu religion but to "Hindustani" as you claimed Shah Rukh Khan to be. If you was smart enough then you would've quickly understood what I was trying to saying. You are angry because Shah Rukh Khan would never even think about visiting Pakistan. Hahahahahahaha, and perhaps he doesn't like Pakistan's people. But I'm 100% sure he would visit Afghanistan if he finds it safe. Look at Dr. Zakir Naik a very popular Islamic scholar from India, he also proudly says that he is Hindustani. However, that does not mean is is not Muslim. I think one day Shah Rukh Khan will get on TV and tell the world he is Pashtun, who's ancestors were Afghans and that he is part of them. This will make the Pakis happy. ----Pashtun
In Pakistan, ethnic Pushtuns, who also speak Pashtu language are considered Pushtuns. There are many Pushtun tribes that have settled in different parts of South Asia over generations and have adopted the local languages and culture and thus have became part of that ethnic group. By some estimates nearly 25% of Urdu speaking people are ethnic Pushtuns that have adopted Urdu language and intermarried with other Muslim over the centuries. Nearly 45 million people in United States claiming German ancestory although they are now part of English speaking Americans. They are also not considered Germans since they don't speak German. The people who don't speak Pashtun and claiming to have Pashtun ancestory cannot be classified as Pashtuns. I think that the Pashtun are ethnic Pushtuns who also speak Pashtu language and may include their first generation children. If they and their parents don't speak Pushtun then they are longer ethnic Pashtun though they can claim Pastun ancestry.
Siddiqui 12:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(1) In Pakistan, ethnic Pushtuns, who also speak Pashtu language are considered Pushtuns. Due! like what else can they be considered as, other than Pashtuns? (2) There are many Pushtun tribes that have settled in different parts of South Asia over generations and have adopted the local languages and culture and thus have became part of that ethnic group. Part of that ethnic group? What ethnic group you're talking about? (3) Nearly 45 million people in United States claiming German ancestory although they are now part of English speaking Americans. These people who claim German heritage in USA are not claiming German citizenships or being from Germany...they are simply saying that their ancestors came to USA from Germany and that they are Germans by heritage (4) They are also not considered Germans since they don't speak German. Who are you to say that they are not considered Germans? and so what if they don't speak German language. There are many people from Asia and other places living in Germany and they all speak German language now...are these people Germans by ethnics because they speak German language? (5) The people who don't speak Pashtun and claiming to have Pashtun ancestory cannot be classified as Pashtuns. I think that the Pashtun are ethnic Pushtuns who also speak Pashtu language and may include their first generation children. If they and their parents don't speak Pushtun then they are longer ethnic Pashtun though they can claim Pastun ancestry. Siddiqui, you are getting confused between Pashto language and Ethnic Pashtuns. Anyone can learn to speak Pashto...that alone does not qualify anyone to be Pashtun. In fact, that means nothing. We Pashtuns believe that "ONLY THROUGH BLOOD" (family background) a person is recognized as Pashtun. User:NisarKand November 7, 2006
Thats news to me. Pashtuns only care about "BLOOD" when it comes to local khels, tabars, and tarbooran. Pashtuns in fact don't care much about the tribe next door who might decent from another forefather. BLOOD amongst Pashtuns only matter when it comes to loyalty, they don't care if one is the son of Ahmed Shah Abdali or Khushal Khan Khattak, if his loyalty is somewhere else he is not accepted as a Pashtun even if he shares the same blood as them. So you are mistaken here. There is a reason why there is so much rivaily between different Pashtun clans. If blood was a big and universal matter then how come it these tribes are easily pitched against each other? Now tell me this, which Pashtun will allow his daughter to be married to a fully BLOOD born Pashtun but is an atheist? Jew, or Christan? Will they allow this BLOOD Pashtun who actually might fallow Hindu religion to marry within their BLOOD? NO, unless you want to end up dead, give it a try. There might be some flexibilty amongstt those who are not in touch with Pakhtunwali and Pakhtunyat, but those who are the core of Pakhto, Pakhtunyat don't only care for blood but many other factors including language, way of life, religion, and loyalty also plays in their interest. AND THATS HOW YOU DEFINE ETHNICTY! Blood linage is just one part of it, other factors come to play as well! HECK even singers musicains who are BLOOD PASHTUNS are not considered PASHTUN because of their profession, they are DAMAAN! and are looked down upon. So how can these filmi actors be accepted as PASHTUNS?Sync2k5 08:44, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Pashtuns are all Sunni Muslims, so things like seeing daughter marrying a Hindu or Athiest Pashtun is the last thing to think of. In America, I've seen Pashtun girls married Kafirs (infidels)...now what would be the difference between a Pashtun Kafir or other regular Kafirs? --NisarKand 18:29, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If we were to classify Pushtun "ONLY THROUGH BLOOD" (family background) then there are 20 million people that are able to claim Pashtun ancestory. There are many Pashtun tribes that have settled in different parts of South Asia during Muslim rule and most of them now speak Urdu. By some estimates 20 million Urdu speakers can be considered Pashtun by this defination. Then I should also claim to be ethnic Pashtun ancestory through Yusufzai Rohilla.
Siddiqui 16:53, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I dont know about Shah Rukh Khan, but I do know this. It is a documented fact that Dilip Kumar is a Pashtun, not only by blood, but by birth, language and upbringing. He was born to Pashto-speaking Pashtun parents in Peshawar NWFP, northern British India prior to Partition. He grew up there till he moved to Bombay for his father's job. He still is a practicing Muslim, has familial links to Pashtuns in Pakistan and is recognized as a celebrity in Pakistan, like one of their own. In fact, his brother is a famous TV actor in Pakistan. Therefore, he is a Pashtun celebrity who must stay on this page. Besides, his real name is Muhammad Yusuf Khan. Dilip Kumar is his screenname. And, he still is a practicing Muslim. Afghan Historian 18:05, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dilip Kumar doesn't speak Pashto, he is a Hindkowal. Even so, why should we honor him as a Pashtun when for money and fame he denied his own heritage by changing his name from Muhammad Yusuf Khan to Dilip Kumar. He is not a practicing Muslim, these people dont have religion, nationality or anything. They go with the flow. It is an insult to the Pashtun heritage by putting this character on the same page where great honorible who have sacrficed everything, blood, money, life comforts for Pashtun and Pashto cause yet their picture is not here nor is there a mention of them here but this fake Pathan who adopted a Hindu name, Hindustani identity, by which he is commonly known and only a select few know him as Muhammad Yusuf is honored! Pathetic! This is about facts and research, not someones Bollywood love affair and romance. You like Bollywood heros, go to Bollywood page. Leave Pashtun page for Pashtuns. Sync2k5 08:54, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think people in the world care about 100% Pashtuns, 50% Pashtuns, 10% Pashtuns or false Pashtuns. The fact is that people in the world just want to learn the basics about Pashtuns, regardless if they are from Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Europe, USA or from mars. There are many NON-Pashtuns living inside Afghanistan, who can speak better Pashto language than the average Pashtuns can. What do you call these people? nopes! They are not Pashtuns. They openly say they are Tajiks, Hazaras, Uzbeks or others. If you people want to have editing war over who is Pashtun and who is not, then leave me out of it because it's stupid. As a Pashtun, I am proud of Shah Rukh Khan, Fardeen Khan, Mirwais Ahmadzai and all the rest that gave Pashtuns a good name in the world, regardless what country they reside in. I don't think we will be able to go meet these people and ask them about what religion they really practice inside their home and stuff. That's very silly. Since these people allow the media to write about them as Pashtuns, Pathans or Afghans, then that's what they are. Pashtun

What you think is irrelevent to the topic and factual research. People do care, and people need to be given information as accurate as possible. If someone is researching Pashtuns then let us introduce them to the real Pashtuns, real faces, not some used to be, could be, and we want them to be because they made a song for modanna or dance with miss world. Plus I have never came across a Tajik, Hazarajat, Uzbek from Afghanistan that could speak better Pashto then a Pashtun, however I have come across Pashtuns of Afghanistan who speak better Dari/Farsi then Farsiwans. Even the Afghan title is deluted now since Afghan is not just a ethnicty but nationality which means that anyone born in Afghanistan can call themselves an Afghan. The same is the issue with Pathans, anyone who was not dark featured and was from the North of Hindustan whether if the person was tajik,turkic,hazarajat,arab decent,persian,baloch, was considered a "PATHAN" by indians and still are because they dont know the difference. The question here is not about liking or war over edits but over acadmic research. Sync2k5 16:11, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you never came across a NON-Pashtun that speaks better Pashto than the average Pashtuns, then you never been to Afghanistan. The "Afghan" title always included Tajiks, Uzbeks, Hazaras and others that were born inside Afghanistan. Well, at least since 1747 that is. I consider all Afghans as brothers, sisters, and people from one nationality, regardless of their backgrounds. Afghans born in Pakistan are not Pakistanis but still Afghan citizens or Afghan nationals. That's the big difference between Afghans and Pakis. The last thing Afghans want to be called is a Paki. The word "Pathan" is used ONLY by Urdu speakers in Pakistan and people in India, refering to ANYONE who is Pashtun. Afghans don't recognize Pathan or Pathans. So Pathan is only a Pakistani and Indian thing. I am Pashtun from Kandahar and all Urdu speaking Pakis call me Pathan when I meet them. Sometimes they also call me "Khan Saab". ----Pashtun

This article has quickly devolved into a mess since I nominated it for FA status

First and foremost the people who would like to add to the article need to put in references of a CREDIBLE nature and look closely at other encylopedias. That means that Hindowans are a somewhat distinct group, but closely related just like the Tajiks are to the Persians with their own articles. In addition, the excessive pictures of Bollywood actors is silly. One is plenty with mention of others and not a biography as their articles should explain their background. Also, the mention of marital races is very racist and just a British POV of colonial times. Again pointless to write in the intro. This article needs to focus on the CORE Pashtuns who speak Pashto (and those who are bilingual in Hindko do overlap and are acceptable in that regard) and needs to correspond to most other sources. The Pathans of India are diverse and, in many cases, may be related very closely, but are as different as the Parsis are from the Persians. This article, by including sub-groups has become a mess and needs to return to a more academic footing. And it's not surprising that it's under FA review for the aforementioned reasons. I don't have time to be a watchdog for this article, but I believe I have some credibility as I'm the guy who wrote the article that became Featured article in the first place. I think we need to take a look at how other academic articles are written and do more to keep it stream-lined and written well. For the people for whom English is a 2nd language, the additions made need to be better written and have sources and not opinions etc. Thanks. Tombseye 22:11, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the History on Attan needs to be moved to another article. It's speculative and not sourced. What is the point of discussing these little details in a GENERAL article on the Pashtun ethnic group? It now looks like a mess frankly. Tombseye 22:15, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mashwanis: help needed

Would someone working on this article please have a look at this edit to the much more neglected article Mashwanis? It looks like it is well-intentioned and has content, but it is written in such poor English that as a non-expert on the topic I don't dare even presume I understand it well enough to copy edit it. - Jmabel | Talk 05:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hindkowans and other matters

Pashtuns are defined in nearly every reference book as speakers of Pashto. Now I realize some groups are bilingual and that is a consideation, but the Hindkowans are also a group unto themselves as distinct as Tajiks are from Persians. They are a peripheral group. Also, I have not seen any references that describe any Yusufzai tribes as being Hindko speakers (though some may know it) and the entire section is not sourced and is written badly. And I suggest the History of Attan be moved to Khattak dance and/or Music of Afghanistan because it seems to discuss a specific issue that has little to do with the general article. Also, will people stop adding massive biographies about Bollywood actors. That's what their personal articles are for. This article is a general one about the Pashtuns. Thanks. Tombseye 23:19, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the Attan dance section to the Khattak dance article where it belongs. In addition, the section on Hindko speakers needs to be either sourced or removed soon. At any rate, this article can simply mention that there are bilingual speakers and leave it at that (as there are bilingual Dari speakers in Afghanistan). Also, I shortened the long bio on Meena Kamal as she deserves her own article, rather than a paragraph devoted to her in a general article. Tombseye 05:42, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And Shah Rukh Khan is a Hindkowan and thus is technically outside the parameters of this article. We need only mention the bilingual groups as they live in Pashtunistan and maintain some academic order here. Tombseye 05:45, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide to me the source that says Shah Rukh Khan is Hindkowan. I want to read it Pashtun Nov. 21, 2006

Hello Tombseye. I decided to replace the image of Feroz Khan with that of Dilip Kumar. I did this because Dilip Kumar is of pure Pashtun ethnic origin as opposed to Feroz Khan whose mother is Iranian. I also felt that the image would be less contentious because of Feroz Khan's comment in Pakistan. Please let me know how you feel about this change. Also, I noticed that you moved the section on Hindko from the Anthropology and linguistics section to the Putative ancestry section. From my understanding, many Pashtuns who reside in Pakhtunkhwa speak Hindko or are bilingual, speaking both Pashto and Hindko. However, I can see why you moved the section on Seraki as it is not a dominant language used by the Pashtuns. Thanks for the time and energy you put forth in this article. With regards, AnupamTalk 07:04, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Anupam, I did indeed move Hindko and the reasons are that, at some point, the Hindkowans deserve an article of their own. The terminology is confusing to people as the word 'Pathan' is applied to everyone from Afghanistan to claimants in India. My own 'take' is from academic views and academics view those who strictly speak Hindko as a distinct group (Tajiks speak Persian and yet have their own article for example). For this same reason, I believe the Pashtuns who speak Dari are also sometimes an overlapping group and sometimes not. In both cases the Pashto speakers and Tajiks/Hindkowans lived in close and mixed quarters. The bilingual issues is more complicated as indications are that the Hindkowans are increasingly switching to the larger Pashto due to intermarriage I would imagine as well, while Dari remains prominent although Pashtun birthrates in Afghanistan are quite high. Siraiki's situation is even more removed in this regard even though it borders the Pashtun regions. As for the Dilip Kumar situation, I am ok with that. Cheers. Tombseye 15:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the "pre-1947 India" stat, as it isnt relevant and it completely underestimates the actual population at the time, which actually subsumed the real Pashtun population of NWFP and Balochistan in NW India, (now Pakistan). Afghan Historian 06:55, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have readded the deleted referenced information about Dr. Zakir Hussain. He was born in British India in 1897, before many Pashtuns, and Muslims in general, left for Pakistan. Several sources support my claims on his ethnicity: Please see IndianMuslims.info: Zakir Hussain 1897-1969: President of India, India Press: Dr. Zakir Husain (1897-1969), Glorious India: Dr. Zakir Hussain, etc. In India and some parts of Pakistan, Pashtuns are known as Pathans. This is one reason why most of these Indian articles refer to him as a Pathan, the local name for the ethnic group. This article should not concern people from specific countries, but people of an ethnic group -- that is what the article is about. As a result, I have redded the sentence about him in The Modern Era section where presidents are discussed. I hope this helps. Thanks, AnupamTalk 18:29, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, I have readded the information about the reloaction of Pashtun Jews. I have also readded the link to the History of India in the History and origins section. Notice, it does not direct to the History of the Republic of India, but to an article which also discusses the histories of present-day Pakistan and Afghanistan. Thanks, AnupamTalk 18:42, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Zakir Hussain wasn't an ethnic Pashtun as he is not a Pashto speaker and none of the links make the claim that he does. He's an Indian Pathan and although many are related to Pashtuns, he's not within the scope of this article which is about Pashto-speaking Pashtuns. Also, the usage of Pathan ALSO denotes local people regardless of whether they are Pashto-speakers or not. Until we have some evidence that he speaks Pashto he can't be part of the article. I've studied the Pashtuns quite a bit within an academic context and the Indian connection is mostly a legacy of Islamic invasions and the British era during which parts of Afghanistan were annexed to British India. We are focused here upon the Pashtunistan area and Pashto-speakers. The vast majority of Pathans in India have putative ancestry and are thus not Pashtun as per the parameters of this article. Tombseye 19:04, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tanoli Pashtun dispute

Hi guys, sorry to return with this issue, but there is a strong dispute with a Tanoli user that they are an ACCEPTED Pashtun tribe by ALL pashtuns. I have only ever read contrary info re this, in that although in cultural practice they are similar but their origin is not accepted to be of Pashtun at all and they are most likely of Indian descent. He hasn't provided any proof at all and is adamant that they are very much accepted as an elite Pashtun people by all other Pashtuns. Although I do believe that Tanolis are very much ethnically mixed to be from a singular background anymore. But can anyone here provide any light on;

  • Are they accepted as Pashtuns by yourselves?
  • Have they always been so?
  • Have you heard contrary to them?
  • What do you know of them? Even basic info would suffice.

Many thanks to all users, lots of info here to learn from :-)--Raja 11:33, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They are a mixed group it seems. Some are Hindko speakers and are thus Hindkowans, a group of mixed Pashtun and Punjabi origin, while others speak Pashto and would thus not be considered quite as 'mixed', but culturally there is an affiliation with the Pashtuns obviously. This is a recurring issue as the Encyclopedia Britannica looks at Hindkowans as a mixed or transitional group, which some people find disagreeable, BUT the language issue can't be ignored as Pashtuns generally speak Pashto, an Iranian language, while the Hindkowans (who aren't bilingual) speak an Indic tongue, Hindko. As for 'acceptance', generally if they can speak Pashto in addition and practice Pashtunwali (or Pakhto), they are 'accepted' as far as I know, but there might be some disagreement. Ultimately, it should be our job to present the facts with reputable sources. Tombseye 21:46, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Thats an interesting point Tombseye re the language point. There are certainly Hindko speakers in this group. This adamant user is trying to allege that the Yousafzai origin of the Tanolis is well known and accepted by all neighbouring tribes and that they have no Indic origin at all, contrary to documented proof that this acceptance is nil and other Pashtuns do not recognise them as amongst them. It would be ideal to see some proof or any other opinions regarding the Yousafzai origin issue. Thanks for your help so far Tombseye --Raja 15:51, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: I don't think that picture is relevant to Pashtun ancestry.)

Shah rukh Khans parents are both pathans so thats why it is relavent. even shah rukh Khan himself said in a TV interview. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.247.228.91 (talk) 12:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Afghanistan is nation of Pashtuns

Please do not try to put Pakistan above Afghanistan, as Afghanistan is the headquarters of all Pashtuns, regardless if the number of Pashtuns is lower than Pakistan. The Afghan Pashtuns are 100% real and authentic Pashtuns, as the Pakis are not. Most Paki Pashtuns speak mainly Urdu as their official language. Rahim Shah sings 5% in Pashto, while more than 95% in Punjabi, so he is not popular than Farhad Darya. Darya sings 50% in Pashto and 50% in other languages. Also, do not remove sourced images because that violates the rules.--NisarKand 07:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


PAKISTAN IS THE NATURAL HOME OF PASHTUNS

Do not make hate related changes to the article. I have noticed your racist attitude towards Pakistani Pashtuns because of the current situation in your country. But, Pakistan is the natural home of the Pashtuns since it homes some 28 million Pashtuns and 3 million Afghan refugees who do not want to return to Afghaniland. Pashtuns in Afghaniland are mixed with Dari-speakers (Tajik, Hazara, and Usbeks) like Farhad Darya and thus have lost there Pashtuness. I was kind enough in leaving his picture there since you guys have no other singers. Also, I have updated the article based on the current world events. Thus, do not reverse my edits blindly.--Napoleon12 10:10 am, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Pakistan better be the natural home to the Pashtuns.--NisarKand 18:13, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You came out of no where and blindly removed all my edits, which are sourced by CIA, Encyclopaedia Britannica and other well known Encyclopaedia, Dupree and others...and advicing me not to revert your nonsene? Baluchistan, N.W.F.P., F.A.T.A. are not permanently territories of Pakistan, and that's where most Pashtuns live. Pakistan is a nation of Punjabis not Pashtuns. I'm sure the Punjabis feel that way. About the current situation in my country? Seeing my country being rebuilt by USA and Europe suppose to be bad? I think we are happier than ever before. As a result of Pakis making fun of poor Afghan refugees living in their country, on October 8, 2005 Allah (Almighty God) Punished Pakistan with a massive earthquake, which killed 150,000 Pakis and turned into refugees another 3 million Pakis. Now that's bad situation, don't you think? This is not about hate or racism, it's about reality. Pakis always assume that every Afghan online must be living in Pakistan as if Pakistan is the only other country, besides USA and Europe, to have internet in their country. Now lets leave this issue...my edits are well sourced and I suggest you try not to delete or remove them. Afghanistan means the "Land of Afghans"...and Afghan means Pashtun....check -----> Origins of the name Afghan. By percentage, Afghanistan has the highest percentage of Pashtuns. At the same time, Pakistan is the 6th most populous Hindu nation (Hinduism by country).--NisarKand 16:18, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Stop living in this dream world and wake up. Today, France is reducing the number of soldiers from Afghanistan as reported by BBC. Nato will soon follow and leave the Americans in a mess just like in Iraq. God forbid.......Pakistan will have a bigger refugee problem than before. Anyway, we should discuss the article in a polite constructive manner benefitting both parties. --Napoleon12 11:35 am, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
The United States and Europe is not leaving Afghanistan anytime soon. Especially not until they help Afghanistan's government take half of Pakistan back. That means all Pashtun Pakis will become Afghans again, the same way their dads or grandads were. If you really are Paki, which I doubt, you should realize that every day airplanes full of Pakis are deported from USA and the west. Pakis are illegally flocking to the west. At least the Afghans living in Pakistan as refugees are there legally by approved United Nations agreements. There are only 2.4 million Afghan refugees in Pakistan as of now (according to the latest census of Pakistan and United Nations' UNHCR reports) and Afghans are going back to their lovely country every year by the hundred thousands. Afghans love their country so much and they don't want to be refugees in other countries, especially not in a poor country like Pakistan. Don't worry about Afghans going back to Pakistan as refugees in the future, that is not going to happen. They left their country because of a very big powerful country (USSR) that invaded it. Again, just 2 minutes of earthquake created the same number of Paki refugees in Pakistan as it took 10 years of Soviet invasion in Afghanistan. At least Afghans ruled your Pakistan nation in the past, and that is respect for the Afghan people.--NisarKand 18:37, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Take your hate messages some where else. I can understand why the truth hurts so much for you COWARD Afghans living in Europe or America. If you love Afghanistan SOOOO MUCH, come back and live there, LOL. --Napoleon12 1:57 pm, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Afghanistan is now a commonwealth of the United States, so it doesn't matter if we live in USA or in Afghanistan. Afghans are known world-wide as the bravest people on earth. Why would only you call them cowards? And you are not a Paki but a Kizilbash Tajik or Parsiban. You are the same user as User:Tajik, Parsiban and several others...coming here to disturb and create problems between Pashtuns of Pakistan and Pashtuns of Afghanistan. We Pashtuns always consider our Ethnic before our nationality...as other Pashtuns and they all will agree.--NisarKand 09:30, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Napeleon12, I can see why you would put Pakistan at the top, however your reasoning for it is very ridicules. And you should change the name of this discussion. This is an encyclopedia, not internet forum. Both of you should remember that. I will put more thought about this, but for now I will leave Pakistan at the top. Meanwhile please read this Afghan. Parsiban 05:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Parsiban, don't waste your time here on this nonsense of yours...I work for the US government as I explained to you before and I have special computer that can track down any online user. You are the same person as User:Napolean12. Sucker!...if you want, I can reveal everything here with your first time coming here to Wikipedia in January 2006. Hahahaha --NisarKand 09:30, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STOP THIS FIGHTING!!! You are both Muslims brothers; you should treat eachother with respect & courtesy! The theory of Afghanistan being the home of Pashtuns is obsolete because, the NWFP provincial government has voted with majority in renaming the province to “Afghania”. This will influence the Pashtuns living in Afghanistan to tilt and become more Pro-Pakistani. Eventually, it will lead to the absorption of southern Afghan provinces by Pakistan due to economic and stability reasons. But, that is my opinion and not someone else’s.--Napoleon12 5:16 pm, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
The reason they are naming the NWFP province to Afgania is to clearly give signal to Pakistan's government that NWFP is a province of Afghanistan. Afghanistan has a much better chance to get rich fast and have a much better security. You must always remember that Afghanistan was in major war since late 1970s, which could not focus on stabalizing the country during those wars. But now the country is seeing the brighter side, it is being rebuilt and security is improving very rapidly, dispite the fact that some people claiming to be Taliban and blowing their selves up. USA wants to use the country as a major military center. It feels safer in a country with less population compare to those with high population. There are 87 American and NATO built military bases so far in Afghanistan...plenty more are going to be built in the future. The American military command center for Asia will be in Afghanistan. As the one for the middle east is in Qatar. Next time when you see or hear the name Afghanistan, think of it as America because America controls the country. Besides that...even if America and NATO nations were not involved in Afghanistan, Iran will step in. If you read Afghanistan's history, this is the reason why the country cannot be conquered by any foreigners. When one tries to take possesion of it..the other side steps in and helps. Now lets see...Iran's economy is 6 times higher than Pakistan's....not to mention that Iran has the 3rd largest oil reserves, including lots of natural gas. In weapons, Iran has much advanced weapons than Pakistan's. If both Afghanistan and Iran get together, they can easily take possesion of entire Pakistan in less than one month. India will also step in and take it's portion of Pakistan's land. During that time, I doubt it if USA or other western countries would try to help Pakistan, a nation that has land disuptes with both neighbors and having a population of 165 million people (most live below the poverty line).--NisarKand 17:56, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep dreaming like always, LOL!!! Isn't that what your leader Dauod Mohammad Khan tried to do? B/c of your obsession with the Durand Line, it lead to the direct invasion of Afghanistan and the deaths of millions of innocent Afghans. GREAT JOB!!! I APPLAUSE!!! BRAVO!!! You Afghans will never learn from your mistakes, LOL!!! I will close this useless debate with a proverb, HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF!!! LOL!!!--Napoleon12 17:56, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We are not obsessed with the Durrand Line, in fact, I hope a permanent border is made there so that we Afghans can finally live in peace in our country. We don't profit from the Durrand Line in anyway...only the border theives, drugs, weapons and illegal merchandise smugglers do on both sides of the Durrand Line. If the border is sealed, Pakistan will become more isolated...by us not allowing any Pakistani trade to pass into my country. Also, we will shut down the Kabul River on Pakistan so that it slowly dies from thirst...LOL. We, on the other hand, have access to Iran's sea port (due to water sharing treaties)...India right now building a new highway from Iran's southern seaport directly to Kanadahar in Afghanistan...which is much suitable, faster and reliable than Pakistan's seaports. Our airports are also improving for air trade. We are becoming less dependent on Pakistan. But Pakistan, without Afghanistan, cannot get electricity from Tajikistan or do other trades on land. Iran just told Pakistan yesterday that it will not provide natural gas. If Afghan government decides and say no pipeline will be allowed on its soil to Pakistan...then slowly Pakistan will become an energy-less country because its own gas is about to run out in 7 more years. Only option left for Pakistan would be to buy from Qatar or other Arab countries, which will cost them arms and legs. I sugges you try to learn what's going on first before you discuss issues like these here.--NisarKand 13:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
About the deaths of the approximately 600,000 to 2 million innocent Afghans defending their country from Communism...that's not something to be ashamed...it's something to be proud of. Communism was the biggest monster on earth for a very long time and we Afghans put an end to it by also sacrificing some of our people while at it. If you look at world war 2...about 60 million people sacrificed their lives to end Nazism and all those that died while saving the world from evil regimes like those in the past will always be remembered and praised. That's pride ma man...something you Pakis don't know about.--NisarKand 14:09, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don’t confuse Balochis with Pashtuns

The Baloch people do not consider themselves as ethnic Pashtuns. Baloch tribal leaders are currently conducting an insurgency against outsiders such as Pashtuns, Afghan refugees and Punjabis who are flocking to the province because of an economic boom. The Nationalistic Balochis leaders fear a demographic shift against the native people of the province. --Napoleon12 11:58 am, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Show me one single report about Baloch fighting with Pashtuns? Baloch are anti-Punjabis and anti-all other non-Pashtuns (Hazaras, Tajiks, Iranians, and etc.) BUT NEVER PASHTUNS as they are both friends since ages. You keep talking outta your back, with your own POVs User:Tajik...hahahahaha.--NisarKand 18:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Pashtuns living in Balochistan have migrated their and are not considered Balochi by the native population. But, Balochistan does consists of small pockets of Pashtun communities particularly the Quetta. --Napoleon12 1:10 pm, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Why are you all worrying about other ethnics if you're not even one? Balochistan is always home to Pashtuns and they go back and forth all the time with no restrictions at all or no fear of any type. If you are non-Pashtun or non-Baloch, try going to Balochistan by road and see what happens to you there. Hahahahaha....Baloch people go to southern Afghanistan freely also because we allow them. Don't worry about Baloch and Pashtuns, as they are both friends and they always will be.--NisarKand 18:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
THAT'S THE STUPIDEST THING I HAVE EVER HEARD. There is a full scale insurgency against outsiders. READ THE NEWS, RETARD! Since the 1970s there has been some small-scale violence. The area had been badly affected by fighting and instability in Afghanistan, with arms and refugees flooding the province. Small attacks have occurred against coal miners, oil prospectors, and energy infrastructure. Balochis have a seperate culture, language and not to mention province. Read Balochistan--Napoleon12 2:01 pm, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
It's just a name of the province (Balochistan), as almost half the population of Balochistan is Pashtuns. Go do search online on the exact number of population of each ethnics in Balochistan and you will learn the truth. It's a waste of time here arguing that Pashtuns are only small pockets when in reality almost half of the population is Pashtuns. I don't have time to bring reports here so I suggest you do it on your own as I've done previosly. I am a very educated Pashtun, and you suckers are just here to explain your own thoughts and feelings. That does not do any good for you because things don't change with your thoughts.--NisarKand 09:57, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Soon the Taliban will step up the BOMBINGS in the interior of Afghanistan. Eventually, the Americans and Nato will have withdraw from the country and leave it in chaos. To them IRAQ is more important because of its oil reverses. The only solution will be to divide Afghanistan between its neighbors on ethnic grounds (Iran, Pakistan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan). In a few months or years most of the world’s Pashtuns will be bought under the leadership of NWFP (Afghania) with American GREEN LIGHT and Afghanistan will cease to exist by 2015. HE HE!!! . --Napoleon12 2:15 pm, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

That's a nice plan you have there, but everyone have their own plans. It's only a matter of who Allah (God almighty) chooses as the Kings to rule the region. America = Green Light? Afghanistan is a nation that nobody can conquer. Even the most strict or pure religious orthadox Islamic fundementalists (Taliban) nearly got whiped out on the very sacred soil of Afghanistan. It's believed by the locals that a handful of soil from Heaven is dropped on there. Prophet Mohammad's (PBUH) cloak and piece of hair are also in Afghanistan (Kandahar). The same cloak he wore while he went closer to Allah (God almighty). In 2001, Mulla Omar opened the box which contained the cloak and pulled it out in public, it was the same time period his Empire (Taliban) crumbled and destroyed, him removed from power to a running fugitive man. Afghanistan has many deep unbelievable things inside it, it's a very strange place. If you step inside Afghanistan with bad intentions, you won't make it out alive. But if you step inside with a good intention, you make it out good. If I was Afghanistan's neighbor, I would be always scared because it's always the poor people that come to invade the richer countries. For example, poverty modivates poor people to go take others under. In this case, if Afghans decide...they will invade Iran like how they did during Hotaki's times of 1722, and take all the riches from Iran to Afghanistan. Same thing with Pakistan or India, the poors will do anything to get your treasures ($$$$). But those who are not poor, are always cowards and afraid of thieves or people that will take their property. This means, Pakistan, Iran, India should always be afraid of Afghanistan because it's just a matter of time that Afghans decide to take your treasures. Don't worry much about the northern countries (Turkemistan Uzbekistan and Tajikistan), they are poor powerless and also very isolated...they don't want any trouble. The way you said about Afghanistan being vonurable at the moment, shows that you are not smart thinker.--NisarKand 20:23, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What you have clearly stated above is your prerogative which is separate from what Pashtuns think in Pakistan. Only the Khuda and time will tell the future and not you or me.--Napoleon12 3:32 pm, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
That again proves that you are User:Tajik because he or she always contradicts in his or hers statements....I mean look above what you stated early (up...before my post) you first explained "Soon the Taliban will step up the BOMBINGS in the interior of Afghanistan. Eventually, the Americans and Nato will have withdraw from the country and leave it in chaos"....and now you said..."only the Khuda and time will tell the future and not you or me".--NisarKand 14:11, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Now what does the Khuda suppose to mean? Hahahahahaha. That explains that you don't believe in Allah (God almighty)...I suspect that you are a communist. Hahahahaha--NisarKand 09:47, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I agree with Napoleon12 here. I have said the same thing before, Baluchis are not Pashtun and do not consider themselves Pashtun. To say Baluchis are Pashtun is extremely incorrect and definatly a POV. There is no source that says Baluchis are Pashtuns. It is a ridicules thing to say in my opinion, unless you can find just one source that claims this. -- Parsiwan 04:59, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Tajik-afghan, who said that Baloch and Pashtuns were the same people? Are you drunk man? Maybe you are fighting your inner self by your own thoughts perhaps because nobody in this conversation claimed of Pashtuns and Baloch to be the same people.--NisarKand 09:39, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Balochis are not Pashtuns, end of story. Plus, I have considerable evidence to prove their heritage.--Napoleon12 5:18 pm, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
What's funny is that both users, User:Tajik-afghan (Parsiwan) and User:Napoleon12, spelled the word Balochis for the Baloch people. This is not even the proper way to spell it. LOL... sucker! --NisarKand 19:14, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Farhad Darya

I am leaving Farhad Darya's picture on the article b/c he is an Afghan citizen and not mixed. Also, important to note is that Farhad Darya is not a pure Pashtun and is clearly mixed with Tajiks. --Napoleon12 12:18 pm, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Who cares what you do? sooner or later all your vandalism will be restored one way or another. Records stay here permanently, so that old images may be restored in the future. If you come here to start trouble with others by removing their edits, you're just wasting your time here.--NisarKand 18:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
SAD!!! B/c I will combat vandalism according to the rules.--Napoleon12 2:08 pm, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Farhad Darya, regardless of him being half Tajik, has contributed enormously to Pashto music/culture. He is one of the more prominent Pashto singers and so his picture is infact very relevant to that section. Parsiwan 05:21, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Don't twist things around....Farhad Darya's father is Pashtun and his mother maybe Tajik...that qualifies him to Pashtun. But does not qualify him as Tajik. Why you purposly hide the Pashtun part and only explain the Tajik part? Remember new born person carries the father's last name...not their mothers. A woman that marries a man attains the man's last name...not the other way around.--NisarKand 09:44, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Farhad Darya does not qualify to be a Pashtun or a Tajik b/c, he is mixed! Regardless, we must recognize his achievements towards Pashto music.--Napoleon12 5:21 pm, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Abdul Ahad Mohmand

I have agreed with NisarKand to post the picture of Abdul Ahad Mohmmand as a source of Pashtun pride..--Napoleon12 2:41 pm, 17 December 2006 (UTC

If you want you may go ahead and remove or delete the entire article on Pashtun people...like we give a $h!t about it. Man we Pashtuns don't want people to know about us...cause we lik it that way...hahahahahahahaha you sucker!.--NisarKand 09:50, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
NisarKand, I suggest you be a little polite and show respect with some courtesy.--Napoleon12 5:23 pm, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Nisar should behave like a perfect contributor. Haider 13:49, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Get lost! nobody can be perfect. Only Allah (God almighty) is perfect. --NisarKand 11:27, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Roger! I am lost. I think you must be using "Kand" for Kandhar at the end of Nisar if I am not wrong? Haider 21:00, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you are the first one to recognize this. The way you spelled Kandhar means you're from India.--NisarKand 18:20, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to my dear Almighty Allah I am not from India, that way I would be calling "PATHAN" rather than Pashtun. I think you like indian Pathan who have lost their culture, language and land, that's why you are thrusting Indian Pathans as Pashtuns like your great Dilip Kumar? Take care Nisar Qandhari! Haider 13:45, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Demographics mistakes

I looked at some of the demographics figures and they do not make any sense. The figures denote non-Pashto-speakers in India and Bangladesh (I've only found references to a small refugee group of between 40 and 60,000 living in India and nothing for Bangladesh) as the reference claims that they speak Urdu. Ethnologue, at least, claims to count only language demographic figures. These inflated numbers seem out of place and are another reason why this article has declined in quality since I nominated it for Featured Article status. We need to keep in mind that we cannot simply insert whatever we feel like and must take not of professional encyclopedias and how they approach this and other topics. Regardless, the demographics information will have to be changed.Tombseye 06:30, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tombseye, thanks for bringing this up. I'm not tto sure about the populations of Pashtuns in other countries but as for India, the currents source states 776,000 Pashto-speaking Pashtuns out of 11,703,000 total. Could you please give the source that discusses the refugees? I hope this helps. With regards, AnupamTalk 06:47, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]