Talk:Pashtuns/Archive 17

are these not pashtuns(India)
watch this video of attan from India jfyi: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWlpz-z4nWs ^^ afghans were in India for centuries even to sri lanka and east asian countries as traders dry fruits,clothes etc. they have lost the link with afghanistan. they are called as pathans in north and pattani in south. the pathan community is now part of Indian Muslim community which includes many tribes. you can find that in wiki itself. however, ethnically, pathans of India will be losing connections to afghania. this is because eastern iranians were allowed to pass India border for centuries for trading purposes. India one-sidedly closed the border on the western region strictly from end of 1970s for iranian people. however, there indeed is pathans who are now Indian culturally and even ethnically after few centuries. if the pasthun's see this as a pov article to claim there are "pashtuns" in India, then you can kindly disregard this post. howeever, the fact remains, many muslim communities especially north Indian claims pathan ancestory. that remains a fact whether it remains in this article or not. . salam from secular democratic country of India, 59.93.1.175 (talk) 13:41, 24 September 2011 (UTC)


 * We need reliable sources to include any of that; note that youtube videos are almost never reliable sources. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:41, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Strange edits by 84.11.11.3
Special:Contributions/84.11.11.3 is adding biased information to the "culture" section:  Pashtun men commonly have sex with other men, admire other men physically, have sexual relationships with boys and shun women both socially and sexually... older, men-of-status, engage in sexual relations with young boys...  The source it cites is an un-authored Fox News article about Afghan men in Kandahar who may be involved in this. This information maybe added to LGBT rights in Afghanistan. This is falsification of source, because it has nothing to do with the Pashtun culture, especially the Pakistani Pashtuns who make up the majority (over 28 million). In fact, the Bacha bazi is a non-Pashtun practice. The very name "Bacha bazi" is Persian. Kandahar historically has been a Persianized city, 30% of its residents are non-Pashtuns (Persians/Tajiks/Hazaras/Uzbeks) and that's why there is still some Bacha bazi going on, and some of the Pashtuns of Kandahar are influenced by the Persians. It is in northern Afghanistan that we always hear about Bacha bazi, that's the territory of Tajiks. Pashtun culture is tribal society and someone involved in homosexual activities is usually stoned to death.Jorge Koli (talk) 21:40, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

You couldn't be more wrong. Homosexual practices are rampant all over southeastern Afghanistan. The practices even spill over the border in Wesh into Pakistan. All you have to do is visit the region and witness for yourself what is locally called, "man love thursday". Adult men engage in homosexual activity right before their holy day. The Bacha Bazi wasn't included in my original edit and was inserted by someone else. However after reasearching the matter a little more, and witnessing first hand, this also proved to be a very widespread act. Even Dyncorp, a US military contractor has been involved in a Bacha Bazi "trade" easily found on wikileaks. The source is not falsified. Just because you don't want to believe that men have sex with boys in Pashtun culture doesn't make it not true. Fox is just one example that was easier to cite instead of putting in a FOIA request for the official military study that was conducted. If you just did a simple google search you would find out how common the practice really is, which is VERY. Now if I got on here and said that "EVERY" Pashtun man does this, then of course my statements would be false. But the fact of the matter is I was completely neutral in every statement I made and cited my claims as required by wikipedia, and you keep reverting my legitimate edits with no basis what so ever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.11.11.3 (talk) 20:22, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * IP, if there are more sources, please provide them (not a google search, but news reports, academic journals, etc.). Jorge Koli, you're not helping either because you're not citing any reliable sources either.  You're not required to "prove the negative", but you're making specific factual claims (Practice X is a part only of Group Y, not Group Z), so I presume you can site sources to verify that.  No matter what, what eventually goes in the article will be decided by reliable sources, not based on what people have personally witnessed or what they are certain is true about their own culture.  Qwyrxian (talk) 21:37, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * One small additional note--nothing from Wikileaks is considered a reliable source on Wikipedia, because there is no evidence that 1) they are accurate, or 2) in some cases, no actual confirmation that the documents are authentic. Qwyrxian (talk) 21:41, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Everything I said above is sourced if you click on the links (including the wiki links) and read to verify my claims. If that's not enough you can do a research to find out the origins of Bacha bazi or slavery of boys during the Persian Safavids, when local leaders often had boys as their sex slaves in Persia. This was happening from the start of 1500s to the 1700s. Bacha bazi or men having boys as lovers doesn't have Pashtun origins is what I'm asserting and that's a fact because I'm an expert on this. Pashtuns are tribal people, they live in very vast rural areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan, and yes the cities that are influenced by Persians do have some of this today. What happens in Kandahar or Peshawar is not Pashtun culture because these are multi-ethnic cities, only the language is Pashto and most people think that everyone who speaks Pashto is Pashtun but this is wrong because language doesn't determine ethnicity.--Jorge Koli (talk) 00:33, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Which is precisely why I left all of those things out of the edit, and instead stuck with the factual verifiable stuff. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.11.11.3 (talk) 23:19, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

More sources? Absolutely. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,44067,00.html  http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-08-29/opinion/22949948_1_karzai-family-afghan-men-president-hamid-karzai   http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2004/07/11/open_secrets/  There that should do for now. Three more articles from reliable sources...Fox News, Rueters, and the Boston Globe. There is alot more where that came from but those three articles from seperate sources all corraborate what I have said before. This is a highly common practice among Pashtun men on both the Afghan and Pakistani sides of the border. It's been going on for centuries. This information needs to be included as these acts are very clearly embedded in their culture despite what Jorge Koli would have you believe. If you want more sources I will be happy to provide them. 84.11.11.3 (talk) 23:38, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * So, those look like reliable sources to me, although all of them seem to point to the same study, as far as I can tell. They do all appear to only be about Kandahar Pashtun, so it does seem like any claim added to the article would need to limit it only to that group (not to Pashtuns in general).  Do others have objections to these new sources?  Can y'all come up with a compromise wording that would include the info (probably in only a sentence or two, as this is just one facet of one part of a complicated people)?  Qwyrxian (talk) 04:28, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Is this information good/suitable for this article? I think it's better idea to use it in the other related articles. Gazaneh (talk) 04:44, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Dear Qwyrxian and Gazaneh, first of all the IP is a vandal. Secondly, we cannot make a conclusion from these sources to label 50 million ethnic Pashtuns as homosexuals, it's very inappropriate to see this in an encyclopedia. Let's be realistic, among which ethnic group homosexuals or bisexuals don't exist? And, do all ethnic group articles mention this information? Btw, the people who wrote these news reports are not experts on the Pashtun culture, they just heard a few folklore stories from people that they interviewed but we cannot rely on this to draw a conclusion or use it as a fact, as what this vandal behind the IP is calling it. The news reports actually tell us that Pashtuns do not tolerate homosexuality or bisexuality, men accused of this are tortured to death.--Jorge Koli (talk) 15:14, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Read the third article I posted from the Boston Globe. That one deals with the Pashtuns in Pakistan as well so the claim does not only apply to those in Kandahar. I don't see why it wouldn't be suited to this article. It is a practice employed by nearly half (more in some areas) the men in the culture. This is a very big part of the their culture. Their are even the same reports from when the British colonials were in the region hundreds of years ago. The number of people involved plus the amount of time practiced would indicate this needs to be included in the article. 84.11.11.3 (talk) 07:32, 20 September 2011 (UTC)


 * That one deals with homosexuals in Pakistan, and Pakistan is a multi-ethnic country with 44.68% Punjabi people, 15.42% Pashtuns, 14.1% Sindhi people, 8.38% Saraiki people, 7.57% Muhajir people, 3.57% Balochi people, and 6.28% other. The gay Pakistanis who are named and interviewed are from Lahore and Islamabad, which are pre-dominantly Punjabi areas. How come you don't add this information in their article? We all know that homosexuals and bisexuals exist in every society, mostly in free societies like in the West, but you're coming here with very strange edits and weak sources, by trying to malign the 50 million ethnic Pashtuns who live in Pakistan and Afghanistan with homosexuals. This is not only a disruptive act and will create edit-warring, it's a huge insult to all the ethnic Pashtuns. It is also distortion, falsification of sources and a way to attack an ethnic group that you probably don't like. You have been vandalizing articles and attacking people that you don't like. You haven't done any edits to articles of other ethnic groups but only this one. I've read all the sources that you provided, they all talk about a small number of bisexual men in the city of Kandahar, and the 2004 source by Miranda Kennedy from India which is posted on Boston Globe is about LGBT rights in Pakistan. Why don't you put the information in that article as it is useful there.--Jorge Koli (talk) 14:59, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Since there is clearly disagreement here, I recommend opening a Request for comment discussion about including this information. 84.11.11.3, if you don't know how to do this, let me know. Jorge Koli, I recommend that you assume good faith--the IP has legitimate sources, though of course there is a question if including them here meets WP:DUE. Finally, please don't insert your own opinions about what is "maligning" a culture--plenty of culture have engaged in open homosexuality, and it's only your opinion that there is something wrong with this practice, whether or not it's actually true. To clarify, I'm not saying that this information should be included, as there does appear to be legitimate concern whether or not this info appropriately applies to the wider Pashtun group, but even if it's only part, that doesn't necessarily mean it should be removed here. Our responsibility is to include all information that is of due weight, even if that information is perceived by some people as negative. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:55, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Qwyrxian, I'm assuming good faith and I'm not arguing about the sources being legitimate or not. I'm claiming that the IP is misusing the sources (few random 2002-2011 new reports that he found while searching the internet) in Wikipedia. I suspect that the IP is now editing as User:Chiton magnificus. He/she is adding things like this into other articles. It should avoid adding the Sexuality section until we hear from other editors. The problem is that the news reports specifically deal with LGBT rights in Pakistan and about a small group of men in Kandahar who may or may not be involved in bisexual behaviour. The Afghan interpreters didn't admit to being bisexual, they just told local folklore stories, jokes and legends to the Americans. The fact is that Pashtuns have equal number of bisexuals as any other ethnic group in Asia, so what's the point of adding something like this into this article when no other ethnic group article mentions such thing? Is there any notable gay Pashtun or a website dedicated to gay Pashtuns? If anything, we should use these sources and a few others to reflect the truth... that unlike any other people, the Pashtuns do not tolerate homosexual or bisxual activities. People accused of such acts are usually punished to death and there are plenty of news reports on that. Something like that is worth mentioning and we can add that despite this there are some Pashtuns here and there involved in homosexual behaviour, but we have to be very specific not to insult the entire 50 million Pashtun population. This is a fair and balanced way to present information in an encyclopedia. If this is accepted then I will also add lots of other relevant information (i.e. it's origin, how neighboring Persians, Tajiks, Hazaras, Punjabis, Sindhis, Kashmiris, and others are being affected by it).--Jorge Koli (talk) 10:46, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * You're not listening. You're imposing some arbitrary standard that has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Wikipedia.  You're re-interpreting the sources to say something they don't say.  You're trying to claim that since there is no notable gay Pashtun, that there are no gay Pashtuns.  This is not how Wikipedia works.  When people present reliable sources, you have to counter them with legitimate policy based arguments, not just your own opinion about what is or is not true.  The only point I agree with you is that editors should refrain from adding this info until we get a better consensus.  Qwyrxian (talk) 13:27, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Telling me "You're not listening" is inappropriate. The things you accusing me of is what the IP is doing and you're supporting him/her. I clearly mentioned above The fact is that Pashtuns have equal number of bisexuals as any other ethnic group... and you say that I'm trying to claim that there are no gay Pashtuns. It seems to me that you're not paying any attention to what I type here because if you did you wouldn't be saying funny things like this. I also want to point out that the 2010 Fox News report states " The report details the bizarre interactions a U.S. Army medic and her colleagues had with Afghan men...", but it doesn't mention if these Afghan men were Pashtuns, Tajiks, Hazaras or other. The Tajiks and Pashtuns are rivals, and if you go to Youtube website you'll see many videos made by Tajiks in which they try to bash Pashtuns by calling them homosexuals, gays, etc.--Jorge Koli (talk) 13:43, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion: Change current article name to Pashtuns or Pashtun people.
Like other Wikipedia articles about ethnic groups, I suggest the article/page name is better to be "Pashtuns" or "Pashtun people". Current name "Pashtun (ethnic group)" is not good. Gazaneh (talk) 14:39, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree.--Jorge Koli (talk) 15:21, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Actually, the article was called Pashtun people until just a few days ago. A major change in name must always have discussion first on the article talk page, except in cases where the prior name is obviously incorrect (like a spelling error).  If User:Abhishek191288 wants to move the page, xe should seek a consensus here via discussion.  Qwyrxian (talk) 06:48, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Pashtuns and sexuality
Some users seems to constantly be removing sourced information on sexual activities of Pashtuns. To these user I encourage to put forward their arguments for removal here. Given that Pashtuns have gained notoriety (at least in the Western World and in Pakistan) for their sexual activities this is an issue to bring up, weather claims on sodomy and paedophilia are factual or fabricated/exagerated. Few peoples in the world have gained such kind of notoriety, and its also relevant when constrasting these factual/supposed activies to the taliban ideologies. Chiton magnificus (talk) 16:04, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The text removed was the following: There have been reports that state that homosexual relationships are "unusually common" among Pashtuns but that this fact fact is persistently denied by many Pashtuns. In the Northwest Frontier Province of Pakistan Pashtun men have gained notoriety for taking young boys as lovers. Western newspapers have reported that after the fall of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan local Pashtuns complained about the a comeback of a series of sexual practices including "the Pashtun obsession with sodomy" and dandyism, paedophilia, homosexual, rape and gay activity. 

Discussion

 * Include - The hypothesis that homosexuality is prevalent in that society is widely commented upon by numerous sources, including:
 * Foucault and the Iranian Revolution: gender and the seductions of Islamism By Janet Afary, Kevin Anderson, Michel Foucault, p 157
 * Compassion: the culture and politics of an emotion By Lauren Gail Berlant, p 213
 * Ethnicity and family therapy By Monica McGoldrick, Joseph Giordano, Nydia Garcia-Preto, p 416
 * so the material can certainly be included. But the WP neutrality policy also requires that balancing material be included, stating that there is no unusual prevalence, such as source:
 * Empires of the Indus: The Story of a River By Alice Albinia, p 42
 * --Noleander (talk) 22:54, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment - To editors that object to this material (e.g. Joyson Noel) the sources are very, very abundant. The solution here is not to delete or engage in edit-warring, but instead to find more sources, read them, and improve the Sexuality section to be more neutral.  For instance:  Is "Sexuality" the best section title?  How about "Relationships" or "Family organization" ... generalize it.   Also: look for sources that argue against uncommon homosexuality: there are lots of such sources.  Read them and summarize them in the section.  Also:  if you suspect the sources are biased, use WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV and identify the sources in the text so the readers can see the bias.  Also:  heterosexual information could go in the section.  In the end the homosexuality material could end up being a small part of the  section.  But wholesale deleting is not the solution. --Noleander (talk) 23:04, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Correction: I am neither for nor against it's inclusion, and was not involved in edit warring. The info is controversial and is likely to be the subject of further edit wars, apart from the current one. I reverted the edit, as i found it imperative that consensus be achieved for this. Joyson Noel  Holla at me!  10:03, 28 September 2011 (UTC)


 * There are many good reasons why this controversial information should not be included. The couple of news reports that are found on the internet and used in here as sources mainly talk about Afghan bisexual men and Gay issues in Pakistan. Upon reading these news reports there is no mention of ethnicity of the Afghani interpreters or the Pakistani men who claim to be gays. Making all of them Pashtuns would be speculation because both Afghanistan and Pakistan are multi-ethnic nations, with lots of different ethnic groups. What the Afghan interps have told the American soldiers is local Afghani folklore and we can't make facts out of folklore. If you look at this LiveLeak video, this is how many Afghan men interact with foreigners or among themselves. Even though I'm sure that there are gays among the Pashtuns but the point is why do we need to add this only in the Pashtun people article when no other ethnic group article has it? I feel that User:Chiton magnificus has an agenda, he uses anonymous IP from Germany to write stuff like this in other articles, and he used the same IP address to add this gay information in Pashtun people. He cherry-picked selected parts to make a point, and he even admits it. Btw, the 3 book references added by User:Noleander need a way to be verified, how can I see what's written in them about Pashtun sexuality?--Jorge Koli (talk) 03:23, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I just read some other material and realized what's going on. The problem is the cultural differences between Americans in the West and Pashtuns in Asia. It is normal for men in Asia to hold hands in public, or play like teens by doing silly things like kissing on cheeks, hugging or pretending to be lovers and etc, although these are considered as homosexual behaviour in the West. When 2 Afghans are seen together the American soldiers look at them with a suspecion that they are homosexuals, ignoring the idea that they may be brothers, cousins, best friends, or father and son, and so on. This is very complicated to solve, it reminds me when I watched porns once in which beautiful Western girls were doing anal sex with men and then when I went outside I looked at every woman on the street with a disgust. Also, I looked for notable gay Pashtun or websites dedicated to gay Pashtuns but no luck finding any.--Jorge Koli (talk) 04:43, 28 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I will not comment Jorge Koli acusations/attack and will let the reader think by himself if I'm biased, have an agenda or is using IPs from Germany. Koli's argument of that the sources "mainly talk about Afghan bisexual men and LGBT rights in Pakistan." is totally misleadings, because the information that is backed up by the sources is refering specifically to Pashtuns when the text do so. I do generally agree with the comments of Noleander and I guess that when this section grow it will change and contents will be balanced out, yes, articles evolve and the "controversial" paragraph here is just the seed to develop this issue. Chiton magnificus (talk) 07:00, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Compromise proposal - First, I've put some quotes from some source on this topic in a new section below. I've read the sources carefully, and I have a compromise proposal:
 * Rename the section to a less POV term, such as "Relationship" or "Family life"
 * Add material that covers all aspects of relationships, focusing on heterosexual: courtship, marriage traditions, dowries, etc
 * Mention that homosexuality appears to be more prevalent to some specifically named Westerners
 * Mention that homosexuality was outlawed and severely punished by death under the Taliban
 * Mention that many authorities deny that homosexuality is more prevalent in Pashtun culture than other cultures
 * Thoughts? --Noleander (talk) 13:36, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Edit warring
Please note that I'm about one or two edits away from fully protecting this article. All sides need to stop edit warring, adding and removing the section that is being discussed regarding Sexuality. The RfC is open, please discuss it there. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:09, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Some sources on homosexuality
"Sultan Mahmud was famous for having a romance with a man: Ayaz, his slave.  Pashtuns - Afghan adn Pakastani - are notorious for preferring male to female lovers.  But the Governor of Ghazni, like most Pashtun men, denies that homosexuality is widespread."
 * Empires of the Indus: The Story of a River By Alice Albinia, p 142-3

"In the late twentieth century, the predominantly Pashtun city of Kandahar, Afghanistan, was referred to by some as 'the gay capital of South Asia' and the practice of homosexulaity was found at all levels of Sunni Pashtun society, both rich and poor. Anthropologist Charles Lindholm observed that in the Pashtun culture, a man's object of love was often a boy or a handsome young man.  Before the advent of modernity, guests were entertained by dancing boys: 'No aspersions were cast on men who had sexual intercourse with a … [passive homosexual]… Modernity gradually broght about a sense of shame regarding homosexuality among the more educated sections of society, but the practice continued…. [quoting Lindholm:] 'the first sexual experience of many, if not most, boys is with one of their passively inclined [male] peers, or with an older man who is a confirmed [homosexual] … Pakhtun [Pashtun] poetry is often frankly homoerotic, following the Peersian model' ".
 * Foucault and the Iranian Revolution: gender and the seductions of Islamism By Janet Afary, Kevin Anderson, Michel Foucault, p 157:

"In the Northwest Frontier Province (NWFP), which shares many tribal and cultural links with neighboring Afghanistan, the ethnic Pashtun men who dominate the region are renowned for taking youg boys as lovers."
 * Nath, Shivani, "Pakastani Families", in Ethnicity and family therapy Ed. by Monica McGoldrick, Joseph Giordano, Nydia Garcia-Preto, p 416

"[in 1990s, the Taliban] also clamped down hard on homosexuality [in Afghanistan], although it was commonplace, indeed routine, across Pashtun areas"
 * In Afghanistan: two hundred years of British, Russian and American occupation, By David Loyn, p 184:

"Kandahar's Pashtuns have been notorious for their homosexuality for centuries, particularly their fondness for naive young boys. Before the Taliban arrived in 1994, the streets were filled with teenagers and their sugar daddies,"
 * More dirty looks: gender, pornography and power, Pamela Church Gibson, p 127

"Kandahar society is infamous for the practice of homosexual relations with minors, although the exact numbers involved are no doubt small."
 * My life with the Taliban By Abdul Salam Zaeef, ʻAbd al-Salām Z̤aʻīf, Alex Strick van Linschoten, Felix Kuehn, p 265

" 'Homosexuality' writes a former interrogator of suspected terrorists 'was pervasive among the Afghans, especially the Pashtuns in the south. Even when they weren't overtly engaged in acts of sex, they would cling to each other, hold each other's hand, and generally cavort in ways that would astonish Westerners and repulse soldiers.' "  [quoting Chris Mackey and Greg Miller, The Interrogators: Inside the Secret War against Al Qaeda, pp 186, 259, 268, 272-3. --Noleander (talk) 13:38, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The Taliban and the crisis of Afghanistan By Robert D. Crews, Amin Tarzi, p 415:


 * @Noleander, I thought you would come up with something new but all these are repeats of the early 2002 U.S. propaganda news reports when Americans were using the media to bash the Pashtun Taliban and their capital Kandahar. This was the media war against them after the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States, and we already went through these above, at Talk:Pashtun people, they all talk about the city of Kandahar or NWFP. Some of my points are:
 * Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni was NOT Pashtun, he was Turkic, click on his article and read. At the very top, you mentioned him as if he was a Pashtun king.
 * This article is about 50 million ethnic Pashtun people, NOT Kandahar, Northwest Frontier Province (NWFP), Afghans, Pakistanis, Afghanistan or Pakistan.
 * Nobody is denying gays among Pashtuns, I'm sure that gays exist in every human society, but why is it necessary that we add this information into the Pashtuns article when we can't even find a single notable or known gay Pashtun, or any website which may be dedicated to gay Pashtuns?
 * As User:Joyson Noel stated above that the info is controversial and is likely to be the subject of constant edit wars. User:Honeywazir is not me, he/she removed the info and then I came to agree with that user that it doesn't belong in this article because what is mentioned about the Pashtuns in the news reports is only speculation and local Afghani folklore and like I said we can't make facts out of folklore. The information in Wikipedia is suppose to be as accurate as possible, and should be very much consistent with the sources provided, but what you doing is the opposite.
 * All these book writers are amateurs, they are not experts on the subject. Anyone these days can write books, I'm currently writing a book.--Jorge Koli (talk) 17:59, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree that the sources are not entirely conclusive as to the underlying truth. But the sources are not "amateur" and cannot be dismissed as providing evidence of perceptions.  The fact is that Westerners have widely remarked on this topic.  Should this be a huge section in the article?  No.  But it should not be censored either.  It may be that the prevalence of gays in the Pashtun world is no more or less than any other country.  But that is not for editors to decide (see WP:TRUTH).  We just have to collect sources and make sure the article reflects what the sources say. The best solution is to have text in the article that says something like "Sources A, B, and C have all remarked on the prevalence of homosexuality among the Pashtuns, but soruces D, E, and F claim that the prevalence is no more than other nations, and that A,B, and C are biased against Pashtuns because ....".  That is a neutral way to present it.  Especially it if is just one sentence in a larger section on relationships. --Noleander (talk) 18:03, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Example from US article: "Family life" section
If we look at United_states, there is a section on family life in the US, and homosexuality is mentioned. I'm suggesting that a similar approach be taking for this article (of course, all the details are different: I'm just speaking in generalities). I'm sure that many articles on nations and ethnic groups contain sections on "Family life", and I'm sure that many of those discuss homosexuality. The Pashtun article can follow that pattern. --Noleander (talk) 18:08, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I've changed the title of the section in this article from "Sexuality" to "Family life". I encourage editors to add material to that section covering all aspects of family life:   weddings, courtship, household duties, child rearing, etc.   The homosexuality material should end up being a tiny portion of that section.  The homosexuality material, itself, could be enhanced by including more "rebuttal" information on how the prevalence is no greater than average; or that the sources are biased. --Noleander (talk) 18:48, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I added information into this section on marriage and wedddings. I also reduced the homosexuality material down to a single sentence (and moved some of the detail into a footnote).   I encourage editors to put aside the WP:BATTLEFIELD mentality and spend some time looking for sources on "family life" (household activities, child raising, education, festivals, etc) and add to the material in the section. --Noleander (talk) 14:47, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

"citation needed" tag
The homosexuality sentence has a "citation needed" tag for the ".. has an uncommonly high rate ..." phrase. Chiton magnificus just tried to add a cite, but the cite was formatted incorrectly, and was already at the end of the paragraph, so I removed that new cite. I did not realize that the cite was supposed to be addressing the tag. I'll look at that cite (Fox news) and see if it covers that, and if it does I'll reisert it. If it doesnt say "uncommonly high" we may need to find different wording for the article that the sources do support. --Noleander (talk) 12:45, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The Fox news source does use the phrase "uncommonly high", and attributes it to a US military report. So Ive put that cite back in, and prefaced the sentence with "A report by the US miliary .." as recommended by WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV. --Noleander (talk) 12:53, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The 2010 FOX News report is about a "unique version of homosexuality". Let's avoid adding words such as uncommonly "high" because I believe this is considered WP:POV in Wikipedia. Btw, I modified the section to include what experts know about this behaviour and a quote which explains that the US military in Afghanistan are fully aware of this.--Jorge Koli (talk) 14:50, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Quote from the Fox News report: "An unclassified study from a military research unit in southern Afghanistan details how homosexual behavior is unusually common among men in the large ethnic group known as Pashtuns -- though they seem to be in complete denial about it." Emphasis added.  So "unusually common" would be appropriate. --Noleander (talk) 16:44, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for my absence but I appreciate the continued discussion of this issue. I am in favor of the compromises put forth by noleander. I think it better reflects the points I was originally trying to get across while appearing more neutral and less offensive. While I can appreciate Jorge Koli's position I would still like to add that his claims about tajiks and hazara in kandahar are not entirely accurate. Hazara predominantly hail from hemland and tajiks from farther north. Pashtuns are dominant in the kandahar region and all along the southern border areas with pakistan to include chaman. Also I am not claiming that all pashtuns are homosexual. I am only stating that because of their cultural practices and isolation of women, homosexual acts occur quite commonly because of an absence of female interaction. 84.11.11.3 (talk) 06:27, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

I can't understand why Noleander and the other guy i.e., Qwyrxian the self-appoited guardians of the sanity of wikipedia articles are siding with 84.11.11.3, who obviously has political motives? This is non-sensical. Is Wikipedia meant to disseminate information or spread motivated propaganda? I blame both of these guys togethor with 84.11.11.3 for the abuse of the platform of Wikipedia to engage in racist propaganda against whole communities. Fundamentally they are racist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.224.245.31 (talk) 01:29, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is meant to disseminate information published in reliable sources, so long as we use them correctly, we meet WP:DUE, the sources really are reliable, etc. You have your opinions about why 84... wants the info in the article, but that is 1) just your opinion, and 2) fairly irrelevant.  Now, if you want to dispute the reliability of the sources, feel free to do that (I have long been of the opinion that using Fox News as a source for, well, anything, is dubious, but consensus disagrees with me, so I support the use of it as a source because consensus wins the day).  If you have alternative reliable sources that verify that, for example, homosexuality is almost always a grievous and punishable offense among the majority of Pashtun people, we can certainly consider including that.  Heck, if you look at the article now, there's already really good counter work, revolving around the idea that the definition of "homosexuality" is not as obvious as it might appear.  The fact is, just because something makes a culture look bad doesn't mean its going to be removed from an article. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:00, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Thread moved from RFPP


Temporary Semi-protect. He's reverting my edits for no reason. First he came to edit under IP, then and now , he is making bad edits to the article and accusing me of propaganda and asking me silly stuff like show evidence to all the pics in the article if they really are Pashtuns or not. He can click on their articles and find out for himself. Can we protect this article because he is clearly here for disruption and edit-war.Jorge Koli (talk) 21:57, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * This Jorge Koli has been making pro-Afghan (nationalist) edits to that page for days now (and without proper discussion) and yet when other comes along to add some Pakistani-Pashtun pictures and he turns around and becomes mad. With all due respect, this page does NOT belong to him. He should assume GOOD FAITH as per Wikipedia policies. He demands for "evidence" (which has already been provided) and yet he offers no evidence for his own edits by merely saying that they are all "Pashtuns." Please, feel welcome to review his edits. Thanks. Kakazai Pashtun (talk) 22:06, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Which pro-Afghan (nationalist) edits? I have been discussing on Talk:Pashtun people with many editors. You added an image of Shukriya Khanum but failed to provide proof about her being Pashtun. You made 3RR and you're telling me about Wikipedia's policy?--Jorge Koli (talk) 22:22, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Nope, you have not been "discussing." Please, check among the references of the Pashtun People page and next to that picture. And by the same token, I want you to provide the very same evidence for ALL the pictures displayed on that very page. Merely saying that they are all "Pashtuns" is not good enough as per Wikipedia polices. Thanks. Kakazai Pashtun (talk) 22:26, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting question.svg Question: Have either of you sought dispute resolution? That seems to me the better alternative. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln) (talk) 22:15, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Jorge Koli is NOT only resorting to edit war but ALSO threatening me to get blocked under the 3RR rule. Please, feel welcome to review his edits and mine. Thanks. :) Kakazai Pashtun (talk) 22:43, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for the prompt response. I don't mind going through the dispute resolution. All I did is to add contirbute to that article (which is cluttered with images of Afghan-Pashtun personalities of all sort) with only two, I repeat two pictures of Pakistani-Pashtun pesonalities with proper attribution and yet he couldn't even assume good faith and resorted to "edit war". Kakazai Pashtun (talk) 22:22, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * You initiated the "edit war", you are exposing anti-Afghan feeling. Those images are all of very important Pashtuns and they are of very high quality work. If this bothers you then I don't know what to say. Wikipedia is not a place for this kind of nonsense.--Jorge Koli (talk) 22:26, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * All of your "edits" and "discussions" with the fellow Wikipedia editors leave a TRAIL behind, so, any fellow Wikipedia editor could review them and decide that how many "edits" you have done so far without any proper "discussions" and how many edits constitute to "edit war." The truth of the matter IS that you are having the the proper DISCUSSION as we speak. :) It isn't about being "anti-Afghan" (All the Pashtun tribes orginnially hailed from Afghanistan), it is about your inistence to have that page cluttered with all the Afghan-Pashtun personalities (without proper evidence) and YET not letting others contribute to that page. It is about Fairness, Assuming the Good Faith and Respecting others' contributions too. Please, think about it before jumping the gun. Thanks. Kakazai Pashtun (talk) 22:36, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Which image of Pashtuns did I add? The article has very "high quality" free images of Pashtuns that are found in Wikimedia Commons and they are correctly applied to the suitable sections. I don't understand what you are having problems with, these images were in the article for many years. Which person in the image do you think is not Pashtun so I can investigate it? I told you that Ghulam Mohammad belongs in the "Modern era" section along with all the other politicians that are mentioned, but you reverted all my other edits, you call this Assuming Good Faith and respecting others' contributions? Shukriya Khanum's claim of being Pashtun needs to be verified, not just for me but for readers who come to read this article. If you add things like this into article, not only me, but others will also remove it.--Jorge Koli (talk) 22:47, 18 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I do not claim to be an expert here at all, but this discussion obviously needs some cooling down. I'd personally recommend that both editors take a break for a while, then come back and rethink their position. To start of with, can Jorge Koli explain why he thinks that the images should be added? Then Kakazai Pashtun can give his thoughts, and a calm and nice discussion can follow. Regards, Ajraddatz (Talk) 23:32, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Ajraddatz, you misunderstood something. I'm asking to remove (not add) the image of "Shukriya Khanum" from the women's section because... 1.) there is no proof if she belongs to the ethnic Pashtun people, what this article is about... 2.) her image is of very bad quality and it happens to be copyright violation .... 3.) we can add her name and describe what she is notable for in the section along with all the other females who are mentioned.--Jorge Koli (talk) 23:51, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * With reference to the FOLLOWING note, given that there are several pictures of Aghan-Pashtun females under the very same section, her picture (along-with the REFERENCED by-line isn't going to make much clutter. Thanks. Kakazai Pashtun (talk) 00:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I am glad that we are having this discussion now. Had you done that before, that would have been nice. It is VERY IMPORTANT to note that I did NOT edit the content of this page. ALL I did IS to add those two pictures. Having said that I would like to reiterate the fact that this page is cluttered with the pictures (e.g. Bacha Khan and Gandhi's picture is not of a "high quality") of Afghan-Pashtun personlaities of all sort. Logically speaking, Ghulam Muhammad and Ayub Khan were both non-Pashto speaking Pashtuns and both of them reached the highest ranking office in Pakistan, thus, their pictures should be coming together. Shukriya Khanum's picture has been inserted with a reference under the by-line. And last but not the least, I would strongly recommend that you assume good faith and respect the contributions of your fellow editors as that's what Wikipedia is all about. Thanks. Kakazai Pashtun (talk) 23:35, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Basically what you're saying/complaining/demonstrating is "why this article has so many images of ethnic Pashtuns from Afghanistan and only few of Pakistsni Pakhtuns". I'm sure that Bacha Khan's image was added by someone to balance the images in that section, he is considered as a Pakistani Pakhtun while most of the others are Afghan Pashtuns. Ghulam Mohammad may have been whatever but he's not as notable as Pakistani President Ayub Khan, someone who not only ruled Pakistan for 10 yrs but was also a popular figure internationally. He occasionally met with world leaders and has good quality pics taken with them. The section "Putative ancestry" is mainly describing "Pathans", and the 2 images of the internationally recognized figures are just used as "examples of who Pathans" are, it is not where you want to add someone like Ghulam Mohammad because he was popular among Pakistanis but not internationally. He belongs in the "Modern era" section along with all others like him. These images in the article are not about "Afghanistan vs. Pakistan", it's about making this article stand out, which is done by adding the highest quality pics.--Jorge Koli (talk) 00:09, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the on-going discussion. With all due respect, you are doing the same thing which you are accusing me of (i.e. you keep on insisting on your own pont-of-view rather than being empathetic and see otherwise). It isn't about "Afghanistan vs. Pakistan" or vice verca. It is bascially about the fact that Ghulam Muhammad was the 3rd Governore General of Pakistan and had his own time of fame and fortune just like Ayub Khan or any other leader of any country. There are plenty of sources available on the web highlighting the bad or worst of Ghulam Muahmmad and Ayub Khan and else. Should you like to keep the Ayub Khan's picture then it is very fair to have Ghulam Muhammad's picture as well in the same section. Indeed, you are more than welcome to add a note about Ghulam Muhmmad under "Modern era" as per your discretion. I would like to assure you that just like any other fellow Wikipedians, I also wish the same for this page as much as you do. :) Thanks and regards, Kakazai Pashtun (talk) 00:25, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Another issue is about the verification of his true ethnicity. There are many sources which state that Ayub Khan was Pathan or Pashtun, his son is currently a Pakistani politician, but for Ghulam Mohammad there is only one source and it isn't very reliable. It's a current Pakistani news staff writer who claims this.--Jorge Koli (talk) 00:48, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * You will need to look deeper and I am confident that you will find plenty of sources online and offline. Thanks. Kakazai Pashtun (talk) 01:12, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Removing the image of the woman who cannot be proved to be on Pashtun ethnicity seems to make sense to me, though I could very easily be misunderstanding something since I am clueless on this topic. In regards to the other figures of debatable notability, why not try to include them both? Both Ghulam Muhammad and Ayub Khan seem like important people, and having two images in that section wouldn't make things too cluttered imo. There are references for both even though one is of debatable integrity, so until one of the two can be disproved both might work. I can even add the content if both of you agree to that to avoid any further discontent. Ajraddatz (Talk) 00:50, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

You're both edit warring. Stop it. Keep the discussion here. I have just tagged the picture of Shukriya Khanum, because I believe it to be a copyright violation. I am fairly certain that cropping a picture does not create a new copyright, and thus the original copyright status (as indicated on the website) still applies. However, I've asked another admin who has more experience in image copyright issues to take a second look. I am temporarily removing that image from the article until copyright status is confirmed. Regarding the overall image issue, this article has far too many images. Any time you see text squeezed between 2 images (one left and one right), you probably have too many. Please find a way to decrease the number of images by consensus. Actually, every single image for which there is not a verified reference demonstrating that the person is Pashtun must be removed: we do not categorize people by ethnicity without valid sources. So there's a good place to start. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:52, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Ajraddatz, It is always nice to have an objective point-of-view in the discussion and thank you very much for offering that. I regret that nobody is questioning or asking for the "evidence" or "proof" about the ethnicity of all the other pictures being displayed on that very page (e.g. Shahrukh Khan claims to be an ethnic Pashtun and YET nobody has seen the hard evidence about his claim. AND his picture has been displayed on that very same page). And when someone adds the pictures (NOT the content) with the availabe resources / references then he is questioned THOROUGHLY and threatened by the very same editor who has been editing left, right and center most of the Pashtun-related pages without even having a proper discussion with any other fellow editors. In a nutshell, please, feel welcome to do whatever you feel is appropriate as long as it is just, fair and equitable. Thanks. :) Kakazai Pashtun (talk) 01:12, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, just to be clear, if a person claims a particular identity (ethnicity, sexual orientation, caste, tribe, etc.), as a general rule, for Wikipedia, that is a sufficient claim. That's because in many cases it's actually impossible to "prove" or "provide evidence".  If the person made that claim and it was reported in a reliable source (newspaper, TV news, etc.), or even self-published it, we would accept it unless there was evidence to the contrary (and then we would still report both sides, though probably would be hesitant to put such info/pictures here). In fact...when I think about it, Wikipedia generally only talks about the ethnicity of living person when they have self-identified.  But, we can deal with the specifics as the arise (especially since "tribe" is not quite the same as "ethnicity").Qwyrxian (talk) 01:54, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi, the photoes of Ayub Khan and Ghulam Mohammad should be immediately removed. Both were Punjabis one speaking the Potohari dialect of Punjabi and the other the Lahori. Claims to Pashtun ethnicity without knowing Pashto are baseless/nonsensical. As for Shah Rukh Khan being called Pashtun, parents went to India only few decades back. And most of his family is still living in Peshawar unlike Ayub Khan or Ghulam Mohammad or others with dubious, unveriable claims to Pashtun ethnicity but no family or otherwise any link to Pashtun Land, language, culture, etc. The viewpoint of Kakazai Pashtun cannot be entertained. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.224.245.31 (talk) 02:20, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Your opinions on what viewpoints are to be entertained are not relevant on Wikipedia. If you can provide reliable sources indicating they are not Pashtuns, then the images can be removed.  Qwyrxian (talk) 07:40, 23 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment I'm going to have to agree with some of the points made by Kakazai Pashtun here, this page is cluttered with way too many pictures of Afghan personalities. The modern era section, followed by "Pashtuns defined", culture, "Pashtunwali and tribalism", religion and the women sections - all these are overloaded with Afghan photos, some of them even unneccessary; I can name some Pashtun politicians in Pakistan who are far more notable than the ones who have their pics here. The only modern Pakistani personalities I can find is Imran Khan in the sports section, the khattak dance picture and two in the putative ancestry section. Considering that Pakistan's Pashtun population is more than double that of Afghanistan's, it would be fair to say that this article should depict some more Pakistani personalities - even if that involves taking down pictures of some of the Afghan personalities here. Mar4d (talk) 03:52, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Extra reference added in Putative Ancestry section
I have added primary references to Putative Ancestry section, by including names of few notable Bollywood Actors, and merged the single example of Shahrukh Khan to the same group.Salman Gurung 10:57, 11 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samsujata (talk • contribs)

The comments above by an unsigned contributor i.e. 'Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.224.245.31 (talk) 02:20, 23 October 2011 (UTC)' is pure nonsense. I do not know where he got his informatiom but he is totally wrong. Ghulam Mohammed was certainly a Lahori speaking Punjabi with Pashtun ancestory but Ayub Khan was born and bred in the Haripur district of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (then known a North West Frontier Province or NWFP. Not only that but he comes from the leading Tarin Tribe of southern Hazara and belonged to its sardar (chief) family - he was the brother of Sardar Bahadur Khan, also a leading politician of his day. Please stop putting your biased opinion/ignorance on these pager. Moarrikh (talk) 00:40, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

genetics
What about that source ? it states pashtuns are genetically related mainly to other iranian peoples !

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Pashtun_people#Genetics — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.233.218.32 (talk) 00:29, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * That's definitely not a WP:RS--they explicitly state that their info comes directly from Wikipedia, with modifications made by "experts"...but note that the encyclopedia is created and run by Sun Myung Moon. In other words, this is a fringe religion taking Wikipedia and modifying it with their own personal take on the world. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:17, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I will delete this section. Most of it is extracted snippets from research which is not specifically about Pashtuns. The YHRD material is OR. There probably is something published about Pashtuns and genetics, so maybe a better genetics section is possible in the future.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 14:05, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Pictures
What basis is there for the deletion of Khushal Khan Khattak's picture from the box in the top right corner? Not only should it be put up again, I further suggest that pictures of Ayub Khan and Imran Khan be added. I would have done it myself had I known how to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.186.161.207 (talk) 11:56, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Bias
Under "Women", there is the sentence, "In Afghanistan, the decades of war and the rise of the Taliban caused considerable hardship among Pashtun women, as many of their rights were curtailed by a rigid and inaccurate interpretation of Islamic law." I think there is room for doubt about the inaccuracy about the Taliban's interpretation of Sharia Law. I would not object to a quote from an Islamic scholar being included which described the Taliban's interpretation as being inaccurate, but the way the sentence is written suggests that it is a confirmed fact that the Taliban misinterpreted Sharia Law. This is biased.

Knight13117 (talk) 18:05, 24 November 2012 (UTC)Knight13117

number of pashtuns in Iran
There are two numbers cited for the number of Pashtuns in Iran. The one in the main text is "Another 937,600 Afghans live in Iran according to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).[38] " The source for this figure is from 2010 so it would be most accurate.

The second figure to the right is 110,000, it is listed as a 2010 figure, but the source it links to is from 1993.

I would like to suggest that this second figure be updated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.153.121.98 (talk) 16:34, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

I have removed Hindi (Devanagri)from the introduction because it has no relation to the topic other than some descendants of Pashtuns being resident in India. Are we going to use every script of a land where Pashtuns reside? Moarrikh (talk) 02:56, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

I agree with you I also removed it but some people are repeatedly adding it without any justification so I add a a new section in talk about Hindi.--Reddony (talk) 18:29, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Hindi Script Unnecessary
Does people have to know what Pashtun is called in Hindi. If you want to add Hindi in a Pashtun article than why don't you add how to write pashtun people in Chinese, Japnese and German. So same question whats the point of writing Pashtun in Hindi. --Reddony (talk) 18:32, 30 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Probably the best choice would be to remove all of the non-English versions--the Hindi, but also remove the Urdu and Persian. Also, you mentioned on my talk page that this was already discussed, but I don't see anything here or in the most recent archives (i.e., back to 2011). Qwyrxian (talk) 22:07, 30 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't agree with your opinion as majority of Pashtuns live in Pakistan and Urdu is the 2nd most spoken Language among Pashtun People after Pashto. Whereas Persian (Dari) is the 2nd most spoken language in Pashtun living in Afghanistan. However, Hindi has no reason to be in this article.--Reddony (talk) 04:54, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Addition of Jahangir Khan, Imran Khan and Ayub Khan Pictures in Pashtun People
They are notable pashtun people.--Reddony (talk) 18:31, 30 April 2013 (UTC)


 * There are already too many pictures in that lead collage. There are dozens of notable Pashtun people. We need to keep the number in the infobox to a reasonable amount. Now, if you want to argue that some of them should be removed and those added, that's possible; the goal should be to have people of a variety of different origins, representing a variety of different fields (sports, politics, religion, etc.). Qwyrxian (talk) 22:04, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Jahangir Khan, Imran Khan and Ayub Khan r NOT Pashtoons. Many people in Asia have KHAN last name but that doesnt mean they r Pashtoon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22 Male Cali (talk • contribs) 14:17, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the importance of these personalities I would only say not including thumbnail of Jahangir Khan (The greatest Squash player ever lived) would be betray to Pastun ethnicity. Similarly, Imran Khan is also a celebrity, politician, sportsman and social worker in one person which makes him even more important the than Hamid Karzai.--Reddony (talk) 05:10, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Unless you have some instrument to measure there Pastun nationality, I would choose to believe what their wiki Page says which says they are "Pashtuns", If you choose to disagree with there Pashtun identity you should discuss that on their respective pages.
 * If you want to add 3 more, form a consensus as to which other ones you want to remove. To be honest, I'd recommending removing at least 6 if you want to add 3--the collage is already too big. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:36, 3 May 2013 (UTC)


 * There is no reliable source that makes Jahangir Khan an ethnic Pashtun.
 * Imran Khan claims that his ancestors were Pashtuns in the 13th century, however, they migrated from the tribal areas into Northern India over 500 years ago. Read page 238, Sports Stars: The Cultural Politics of Sporting Celebrity edited by David L. Andrews, Steven J. Jackson. Over time, these people have become mixed with Punjabis and other ethnic groups, and are no longer considered Pashtun people. Imran Khan does not understand or speak Pashto language, he does not practice Pashtunwali, he does not live in the Pashtun areas, and never did he claim to be a Pashtun. He is a Punjabi by birth, language, culture and everything else. The Pashtuns view Punjabis as one of their enemies. This rivalry began during the Sikh Empire of Punjab in the early 19th century.
 * Ayub Khan's image already appears in the sub-section "Ancestral definition". In addition to that, he also didn't speak Pashto or practice Pashtunwali. Someone like that does not belong in the infobox.
 * I agree with Qwyrxian, there are too many irrelevant images in the infobox. It should only show undisputable Pashtuns and those who are known world wide.--39.41.214.16 (talk) 17:48, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree with Qwyrxian and "22 Male Cali" There are many "Khans" in south asia and who possibly could be of Pathan descent but are NOT ethnic real Pashtuns. These characters are mixed to varying degrees especially Jahangir Khan who looks completely foreign. I suggest removing the characters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.211.223 (talk) 02:00, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

picture
the last picture with the screen scarf, has vandalism issues and found in multiple places, can you just use one with a women with a burqa, i am a women myself and dont believe in it, but it is a big part of the culture and there's no even one picture of a woman Nursingxmajor (talk) 20:51, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Pictures
the pictures on this page of little kids is so different from what Pasthus really look like in real life, pathetic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.252.17.164 (talk) 19:21, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
 * If you know of other free (non-copyrighted) photos that we can use, please suggest them, rather than just being insulting. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:13, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

You should include picture of Ghulam Ishaq Khan the seventh president of Pakistan and Khushal Khan Khattak a pashtun poet. I think some major pashtuns in afghanistan have been ignored Tigerkhan007 (talk) 06:50, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Bias
This article makes it seem like every group which claims themselves to be Pashtun east of the Indus are extremely intermixed with local populations and not real Pashtuns. There are some albeit few communities deep within India today where through strict cousin marriages genetically pure Pashtuns can still be found. Even the source in that section [27] goes on to talk about such communities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SAKhan2 (talk • contribs) 10:49, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I don't understand what you're saying. There's no such thing as a "genetically pure Pashtun", because the concept of "Pashtun", like all social groups, is a purely social construct. You can't look at someone's genes and identify the social group they are classified in. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:26, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

The Pashtun population location map is incorrect. It has missed alot of the area of Eastern Khyber pukhtunkhwa and central Kyber Pukhtunkhwa as non-pashtun, when majority of the population their is actually pashtun. Tigerkhan007 (talk) 06:54, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Images
User: Khestwol recently changed the images in the infobox, and then User:Fareed30 reverted. After Khestwol re-reverted, I then returned the article to the original version. Please note that I have absolutely no opinion whatsoever on whether the new or old images are better (to be honest, I don't think we should have any images in infoboxes of ethnic groups, but I know I'm in the minority), but I do know that given the past contentiousness of this page, and the fact that these image fights can rapidly spiral out of control, I wanted to stop the edit warring right away, before it starts. Khestwol, please make your case here for why the images should be changed (the burden will lie on you, as the one wanting to move away from a consensus version). Qwyrxian (talk) 10:25, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Just so you're aware and understand the situation, Khestwol is a Pakistani and he favors the idea of adding Pakistani faces into the infobox, and wants to reduce faces of Pashtuns who are from Afghanistan. He replaced Mahmud Tarzi, who is considered some what as Afghanistan's Allama Iqbal, with Jahangir Khan, a retired Pakistani squash player. There's no reliable/verifiable source that explains Jehangir as being an ethnic Pashtun. I never heard of any Pashtun male with "Jehangir" as his first name, and "Khan" is many times used by non-Pashtuns (i.e. Ismail Khan and Genghis Khan). Jehangir Khan does not even possess Pashtun physical feature. Secondly, he is not even that notable to have his image in an infobox of an article about 50 million Pashtun people. Naghma is one of so many Pashtun singers, there's nothing special about small time singers like her especially these days. Sher Mohammad Karimi is a Pashtun who leads an entire army of a modern state so that is enough for notability I think.--Fareed30 (talk) 10:33, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Fareed30, please stop calling me "Pakistani" or the personal attacks, thanks. The current infobox was arranged by you alone recently, and doesn't represent any consensus. Khestwol (talk) 11:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Calling someone (who has a name such as yours and who edits Pakistani pages) "a Pakistani" is not in anyway a personal attack. It just implies that you relate to that area of the world and deal with Pakistan. I had to mention it so everyone who gets involved here can better understand the situation.--Fareed30 (talk) 11:54, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I think we can add an image of Rahman Baba, the most read Pashtun poet. We can add Khushal Khan Khattak, the Afghan national poet. We can add Jahangir Khan, the most famous Pashtun squash player from Neway Kelay, a Pashtun village. Naghma also is notable enough, she is NOT an ordinary but among the most popular Afghan singers. At present I can see some people who didn't even speak Pashto (but instead a Persian dialect) as their primary/first language. Khestwol (talk) 11:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with Rahman Baba or Khushal Khan Khattak except that their images are contemporary imaginary drawings and that is kind of silly to use in infobox. Anyway, show us right here proof that Jahangir Khan is Pashtun. So far you're just speculating that he is and is probably based on village talk. About Naghma, it would be unfair to ignore all the other popular Pashtun singers and only notimate her. For that reason we don't add her but you may add her in the women section of the article.--Fareed30 (talk) 12:16, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Fareed30, Khestwol is correct: comment on content, not contributors; that kind of comment will lead to a block. Also, don't make comments like "doesn't have Pashtun features"--that's WP:OR and not allowed. Now, of course, it is necessary that any image used in this article must have verification of Pashtun ethnicity in a reliable source. Finally, I do want to comment that in these infoboxes, it is generally the case that we include people from a large variety of professions, including pop culture and sports. If there are none currently in the infobox, something should probably be removed to make remove for some sort of pop culture person who is verified and can be mutually agreed upon. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:14, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * It's not my fault that some people misunderstand my comments. Are you saying that Wikipedia has a policy in which editors are strictly prevented from mentioning another editor as an American, a German, a Canadian, or a Pakistani? What sort of policy is that and where is it? I'm not against singers or sports people but Naghma is considered a small time singer, therefore not notable enough to go in the infobox. I rather favor Rahim Shah, who happens to be Pakistani and one of the most popular Pashtun singers out there. He is popular among Pashtuns and non-Pashtuns. Naghma may be added in the women section of this article.--Fareed30 (talk) 12:05, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I have noticed that the info box has the image of Kader Khan, an Indian actor of Pashtun ancestry from Afghanistan, he is not as famous as other Pashtuns of Bollywood, particularly Salman Khan, who is just a 3rd generation Indian Pashtun, his grandfather migrated to India from Afghanistan, his image should be in the info box. NextSaagar (talk) 12:12, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Kader Khan is unarguably a Pashtun who was born in Afghanistan and still able to speak and understand Pashto. He appeared in 100s of films, and usually playing a Pathan style role. For example, in Aa Ab Laut Chalen he plays the role of a Pathan taxi driver living with a Sikh taxi driver in NYC. Many Pathans in America live that way and they all know who he is. Therefore, it's best to use him in the infobox than those who adopted a new culture.--Fareed30 (talk) 12:23, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

BLP violations
Every living person named here must have a clearly reliable source in this article (see WP:RS for any claim they are Pashtun. Please read WP:BLP. Names with no sources may be removed. I've just removed one image where there was a source that didn't even mention ancestry. Dougweller (talk) 09:48, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
 * This group is recognized and identified by 3 different names, 1. Pashtun, 2. Pathan, and 3. Afghan (historically). Shahrukh Khan made it quite clear that he belongs to this group  and everyone in South Asia knows that he is Pathan, which is the term used by Indians and Pakistanis for someone from this group. It mainly refers to someone who was born and lives outside of the traditional Pashtun area, particularly in non-Pashtun areas of Pakistan, India and Bangladesh.--Fareed30 (talk) 14:01, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I can't find any verification that that Twitter account is Khan's official account, which means we can't use it as a reliable source for personal information. As for the video, well, it's a copyright violation, so we can't link to it even as a reference; if we knew the details of the original broadcast, we could conceivably verify it as a show rather than a website video. Alternatively, we could look for other verification. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:49, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not suggesting that we use the 2 links in this article. I just wanted to establish with clear and convincing evidence (among editors) that he proudly identifies self as a member of this group. In addition, his father was born in Peshawar (cultural center of Pashtun people), and he even looks and behaves like a typical Pathan actor. Therefore, I don't think we need to worry about him.--Fareed30 (talk) 13:20, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, our rules don't work that way. For some facts, we can use "common sense" to include information, even if we don't readily have a source. But for information about living people, we must have high quality sources. This is especially true for information which may be contentious, and ethnic group affiliation always falls under this restriction. So we cannot include Khan here without the necessary reference. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:27, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I think you're making your own rule and enforcing it on me. Wikipedia does not require high quality sources, any reliable published source will do in order to add a related image in this article. There are more than enough reliable published sources for Sharhrukh Khan belonging to this ethnic group. Btw, we're not editing his article but just putting his image in this article, and here are other supporting RSs. .--Fareed30 (talk) 01:39, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Please take a read of WP:BLP. The rules for living people are different than the rules for other subject. Furthermore, the rules for ethnicity, religion, and sexual identity of living people are even more strict. And, going further, the rules are actually stricter off the person's page, when featured in a list or category, than they would be on his page--see WP:BLPCAT. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:50, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
 * You're right, all editors need to follow these strict rules when dealing with ethnicity. I think this is a satisfying RS for Shahrukh Khan's image to be kept in this article, which states: "While we all know Shah Rukh is a Pathan, went to school in Delhi, has a cricket team in Kolkata and lives in Mumbai, we discovered his strong South connection over a conversation. We bring you an excerpt from the same, where Shah Rukh talks about how his Pathan father fell in love with his South Indian mother." How SRK’s Pathan father fell in love with his South Indian mother, by Priya Gupta, The Times of India (August 4, 2013). I could bring more RSs if this isn't enough.--Fareed30 (talk) 20:44, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Pashtun in India?
Lets keep it real. This is wholesale fabrication. This article is semi-protected or else i would have deleted this erroneous number of 11 million Pashtuns in India. Please correct this false information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.175.27.29 (talk) 08:42, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
 * So, are you saying that the Indian census is wrong, or that whoever added the info with that census link misrepresented the census? Qwyrxian (talk) 09:29, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Dont really want to create a wiki id just to correct your mistake. Ill let someone else correct these errors in the future. Your supposition of this imaginary number does not change facts. Das ding an sich. 184.175.27.29 (talk) 08:03, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The Indian census does not record the ethnic background of the population (See link: http://censusindia.gov.in/Data_Products/Library/Indian_perceptive_link/Census_Terms_link/censusterms.html) The fact that you are making up this number says a lot more about your state of mind than the demographics of India. Think about that.184.175.27.29 (talk) 08:16, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I have several questions for this IP from Ontario, Canada, how do you know that 11 million Indians of Pathan heritage don't live in India, a country that has a population of 1.2 billion? Who are you to be calling it errors, false, imaginary number, wholesale fabrication? Do you have knowledge about the more than 500 years history of Pathans in India? If you did then you wouldn't be so aggressive and calling the 11 million as errors, false, imaginary number, wholesale fabrication. The 11 million is only suggestive figures, and it's also possible for the number to be much higher than that. --Fareed30 (talk) 13:46, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * In India, "Pathan" is usually recorded of each individual under caste. Every birth certificate in India mentions religion, caste, tribe and other personal information.--Fareed30 (talk) 13:57, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Look up the latest census in India online, I did. There is no mention of this. Wholesale fabrication. An educated member will be deleting this in the future. No worries.184.175.27.29 (talk) 19:30, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * "Yes the two Indian women are not Pathan but the point in this is that nearly all Pashtuns (especially Pashtun/Pathan) women are so much in love with Bollywood films and they see Indian female celebrities something as role models.)" and "Pashtuns, especially their females, love watching Indian films and dramas." Added by Fareed30. These will be deleted soon as well. Incredible! 184.175.27.29 (talk) 19:39, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The first line you quoted is just me explaining something to other editors in the edit summary and it generally cannot be deleted. The second line "Pashtuns, especially their females, love watching Indian films and dramas" is something that is well known and there are plenty of RSs to support it. Why do you wish to see these deleted? This is useful information so readers can learn that Pashtuns are influenced by Indian movies and dramas, it's verifiable truth and relevant for the modern era section. My only point in this is basically to teach readers that Pashtun people as a whole are not that interested in Hollywood but Bollywood instead. Pashtun females try to look like their favorite Bollywood female stars, especially on wedding day. They know these Bollywood celebrities by face and name, but they know very little about Hollywood people.--Fareed30 (talk) 23:52, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Dispute resolution opened: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Pashtun_People Observerpashtun (talk) 01:04, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I am a dispute resolution volunteer at WP:DRN. I closed the above DRN case because editors are required to have an extensive discussion and make a real effort to resolve the dispute on the article talk page before asking for dispute resolution. --Guy Macon (talk) 10:47, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Here is a link to the census. http://www.censusindia.gov.in/default.aspx. Where is this manufactured number? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.175.27.29 (talk) 00:49, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Posting the home page of Indian government website is useless here. The burden of proof usually switches in arguments like this so it's your turn to provide an RS that indicates that 11 million Pathans in India is false or exaggerated, and that around 11,000 Pathans actually lived in India in 2001. Isn't this what you want to see in the article.--Fareed30 (talk) 12:21, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
 * What do you mean the burden of proof switches? This is not a ping pong game. This article was consistent for years before you started making up data. Where is this 11 million figure? Observerpashtun (talk) 14:10, 26 October 2013 (UTC)Observerpashtun (talk) 14:15, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The only data available says that 11,000 people in India speak Pashto. Your reference is invalid as there is no mention of any Pashtun people according to the census you quote. So as it stands, this article has unsubstantiated data. Maybe we should take out the number altogether? In any case, I will be reverting this number back to the original number once my account is confirmed, or until someone else comes along. At that point we can take this back to dispute resolution. Observerpashtun (talk) 14:14, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I stated in the other discussion that I DID NOT ADD THE 11 MILLION but another editor (Krisxlowry) did, so why you keep accusing me of something I didn't do? I'm only giving my input here.--Fareed30 (talk) 21:55, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
 * This isn't ping pong but a place to share information with other editors. I asked you for the burden of proof because you strongly rejected the 11 million Indian Pathans as wholesale fabrication. Did you personally interview the entire population of India and learned that there is no such thing as 11 million Pathans, or you read somewhere to learn this? Share your source of info please because you pretend like you're very sure.--Fareed30 (talk) 22:03, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
 * My input: I feel 11 million Pathans in India is very possible given their 500 years history there and the country having about 1.2 billion population. Plus, it is consistent with the 50 million total population given by: Lewis, Paul M. (2009). "Pashto, Northern". SIL International. Dallas, Texas: Ethnologue: Languages of the World, Sixteenth edition. Retrieved 18 September 2010. "Ethnic population: 49,529,000 possibly total Pashto in all countries."--Fareed30 (talk) 22:08, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Well Krisxlowry added something unsubstantiated to the article and we can take it out then?

Chronology of events: 1) Data was consistent for years until a user changed number to 11 million a little over a month ago. 2) This number was unsubstantiated and every effort to go back to the original population keeps getting reverted back to 11 million by you. 3) You originally claimed this number of 11 million is in the Indian census. It is not, I checked. 4) Burden of proof is on the original change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.175.27.29 (talk) 22:31, 26 October 2013 (UTC) In addition, you cannot reverse engineer 11 million by some grade school math. The 50 million stated in that link is not based on a study. I read the article and it says that there could be about 50 million. Even if that number is true, Why do you presume the remainder of the population is in India? This is extremely illogical. Observerpashtun (talk) 22:34, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
 * For many centuries, Pathans went to Northern India in large armies and many settled there because it was a better place. Others (ordinary Pathans) followed them for reunification or other purposes, and they even ruled from Delhi. The only thing we need here is a better source to determine what is their estimated population.--Fareed30 (talk) 23:09, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
 * "Of the Pathans, there are above 6,000 families, chiefly settled in Nawada, Sheykhpura, and Patna." (The History, Antiquities, Topography, and Statistics of Eastern India: In Relation to Their Geology, Mineralogy, Botany, Agriculture, Commerce, Manufactures, Fine Arts, Population, Religion, Education, Statistics, Etc., by Robert Montgomery Martin, Cambridge University Press. )
 * You can see that significant population of Pathans are even settled as far away as the state of Bihar, northeastern India, very far away from Pakistan and Afghanistan. Also, in Uttar Pradesh and other states of India.--Fareed30 (talk) 01:00, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Comment
The population of Pashtuns in India is not 11 million, it is a few thousand at best if Pashto-speakers are counted. The 11 million figure does not have a reliable source so as such we cannot quote it. It must be noted that just having distant Pashtun ancestry does not make one a Pashtun. Pashtuns are a strictly tribal society divided into hundreds of different tribes, and Pashtun scholars classify Pashtuns as those who speak Pashto and practice the code of Pashtunwali.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 03:41, 27 October 2013 (UTC)


 * A better idea would be to quote the actual number of Pashtuns in India in the infobox (as has been done for years), and if a source can be found for the 11 million who claim Pashtun ancestry, a footnote can be added into the article along the lines of "Refers to Pashto-speakers only. If ancestral claims are included, the population may be 11 million" etc.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 03:44, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Malala's image
Malala Yousafzai's image is of bad quality, she's just a blogger who became famous recently in the media, and we already have her image in the women section. Kader Khan has been appearing in major Bollywood films since the 1970s, that qualifies him for the imagebox of this article.--Fareed30 (talk) 23:55, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Just a blogger? Who was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, and who has won several other major international awards? Who was the victim of an attempted assassination? Who's met with dozens of major world leaders? I would say that hardly qualifes as "just a blogger". Qwyrxian (talk) 04:43, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm aware of all this but occupationly she is just an English language blogger. She didn't get the Nobel Peace Prize, many women are assassinated at least she survived. You may not watch Bollywood, the 2nd largest after Hollywood, Kader Khan has appeared in over 450 films since 1973 and still appears in them today.--Fareed30 (talk) 05:36, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying that Khan doesn't belong (I have no opinion on that matter), just that your rational for rejecting Yousafzai is, well, flawed, in my opinion. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:46, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I gave more than one reason (i.e. bad quality image and we already have her sitting next to Obama and family in the women section). We need to avoid trying to make her the Queen of 50 million Pashtun people as that will turn this well-written encyclopedia article into someone's blog page. Just so you know me, I think like a judge sitting inside a court room, I review everything before I do the action. I don't favor someone because of their looks or being famous in the news, I look to see what that person has accomplished in his/her's entire life.--Fareed30 (talk) 13:15, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

why is this article more focussed towards Afghan pashtuns?
This is a fact that pashtuns in Pakistan are much more than the pashtuns in Afghanistan but what i see in this article is complete baised attitude of the editor towards the afghan pakhtuns in everything for example, the editor has placed all the pictures of pashtun from Afghanistan while only the picture of Shahid afridi from Pakistan is there (No Imran khan, Ghulam Ishaq Khan, malala yousafzai, jan sher khan, jehangir khan,Rahim shah, etc )are there. Why is this article suggesting that only pashtuns from Afghanistan have been editing it. I woukd appreciate why people like hamid karzai are listed in the pictures and no imran khan, who is Khatol Mohammadzai while people like Ghulam ishaq khan are not even in the list. why is farhad darya there and no rahim shah. The Pictures in the top left side suggest that the editors were Afghan nationalist rather than pashtun which is clearly seen in the article. I would appreciate if somebody could replace pictures of Khatol Mohammadzai, hamid karzai, Sher Mohammad Karimi with some sensible choices like, Ghulam ishaq khan, world champion jan sher khan, best pashto singer rahim shah or any better options. Pashtuns in Pakistan have been more succesfull than in Afghanistan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saladin1987 (talk • contribs) 15:30, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Proposed edits
Citations require review. citation 21 leads to a rehash of the same page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.161.81.14 (talk) 04:34, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

BLPsources tag
I'm all for more sources, but does the BLP part of the tag make sense to anyone else? As far as I can tell, WP:BLPGROUP doesn't even apply here, there seem to be 50 million Pashtuns. Not particularly a small group. Going to boldly replace it with a normal article CN tag. Cannolis (talk) 01:13, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
 * If you are happy about removing all the unsourced images or mentions of living people, that's fine. Otherwise the tag should be replaced. We are claiming that these people are Pashtun without sources at the moment. Dougweller (talk) 10:17, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Agreed, I replaced it. Cannolis (talk) 12:20, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 13:59, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 March 2014
Please remove: "Both the Pashtun people and the Pashtun language are considered to be Eastern Iranian" and do not replace

And please remove: are an "Iranian" ethnic group and replace with "Aryan"

The following citing/reference is FALSIFIED, it makes NO MENTION of Afghans being "iranian". It is 100% inaccurate: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashtun_people#cite_note-Brit-Pashtun-21)

Barakzai1919 (talk) 06:17, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: This request appears to duplicate the above request from March 14. Should we keep the discussion up there? Sam Sailor Sing 10:01, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 March 2014
please remove opening text in second paragraph "Both the Pashtun people and the Pashtun language are considered to be Eastern Iranian."

because the information is uncited and it is not true. It is not backed by any source. Pashtuns are ethnic Afghans, not Iranians. The Pashto language is a combination of ancient Greek and Dari (the language of the Afghan Sassanid royal court).

174.65.84.61 (talk) 00:44, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: This sentence in the lede is repeated and sourced later in the article under "Pashtuns defined". It is sourced to the Encylopedia Britannica which is certainly sufficiently reliable of a source. However, I do not have access to that article and am unable to verify this personally. So, while I am declining this request at this time, if someone else has access to the article and the source turns out to not back up the statement, I will be happy to change accordingly. Cannolis (talk) 01:06, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

The following citing/reference is FALSIFIED: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashtun_people#cite_note-Brit-Pashtun-21)

it makes NO MENTION of Afghans being "iranian". It says they are "Aryans" and should be linked to the wikipedia page for "Aryans". It also mentions the other theory that they descend from King Saul of Israel. So this citing and claim of Afghans being "iranian" is 100% inaccurate and most likely the personal opinion of the wiki editor: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashtun_people#cite_note-Brit-Pashtun-21)

Please change.


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. I hear two things: A. The statement "Pashtun language are considered to be Eastern Iranian" is wrong. It does however seem from Pashto language to be the way the language is classified. B. The statement " Pashtun people ... are considered to be Eastern Iranian" is wrong. As we see from section /Pashtuns defined/ "Among historians, anthropologists, and the Pashtuns themselves, there is some debate as to who exactly qualifies as a Pashtun." and we get 3 prominet views. Can we get a reliable source quote on Aryans? Sam Sailor Sing 10:17, 19 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Done Sorry folks, but the sentence was added recently with the source being a copy of this article. That was removed and the EB added, but I've read the EB article (through my library) and it doesn't mention any of this, But a major reason to remove it is that the relevant material is already in the lead. The lead calls them an Iranian ethnic group, it says their language is Pashto, and that their origin is unclear. Whether the first paragraph of the lead should be changed would be another issue, but the sentence in question doesn't belong there. Dougweller (talk) 13:28, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Recent POV in the lead section
Pashtuns are specifically an Iranian-speaking ethnic groups and they belong to Iranian peoples (Iranic) ethno-linguistic group. Iranian does not mean they are from Iran, it's an ethno-linguistic group and classification similar to Germanic peoples. I saw some users requested to remove "Iranian" term and finally an user removed that term with this ridiculous edit summary (his personal analysis and POV). That edit summary shows the involved user isn't familiar with this topic. I'll restore removed content. --Zyma (talk) 21:24, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * The same user also removed other statements from the lede of the article. I restored most of that content as well. Khestwol (talk) 08:58, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Another user (Nasirakram1440) is removing and changing content seemingly along the same pattern as the other user before them. I reverted their edits also. Khestwol (talk) 17:14, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Khestwol, you're right, I saw them too. I'll watch this article and I'll report to admins or request a RPP if necessary. It's better for those users and IPs to click on Iranian peoples, Iranian languages, and Pashto language. Read them before making further nonsense edits with laughable edit summaries. And if those users are fans of "Aryan" word, I should say: Iranian/Iranic is a same thing (study its etymology). --Zyma (talk) 18:21, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 April 2014
Please include "Mardan" district (Pakistan)in the metropolitan centres of Pashtuns.

Hunain003 (talk) 14:17, 24 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: as you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to any article. - Arjayay (talk) 15:57, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 July 2014
The infobox is screwed up, I would like permission to edit it or would like someone else to fix the problem.

61.8.223.130 (talk) 09:55, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

✅ - someone had deleted the closing double bracket - Arjayay (talk) 10:18, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 July 2014
Please include Abdul Ahad Mohmand, the pushtun astronaut, and Abdul Qadir khan, the nuclear scientist behind Pakistan's nukes.

Dman9089 (talk) 04:17, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — cyberpower ChatOnline 10:09, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Add pictures and why got old pictures removed from the info box?
Why got pictures from Kabir Stori removed in this article from the info box? He was a very famous poet and Pashtun Leader - and when we are talking about the info box .. a pashto singer is missing, Afzal Khan Lala (Pashtun Leader, former pakistani provincial), a pashtun sportsmen is although missing..

Thank you, very much. --Pakhtun1103 (talk) 18:28, 6 September 2014 (UTC)


 * You cannot add images in infobox of this article of someone you find important when in fact that person is not prominent. There are rules and regulations on how to select suitable images for the infobox. These days almost everyone claims to be a poet and a leader.--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 13:46, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

He although got a school renamed after him, he was a prominent for the Pashtuns.. --Pohyal98 (talk) 16:44, 15 September 2014 (UTC)


 * This article is not made for Pashtun people, it is made for all English readers around the world. Your argument is unpersuasive. There are 50 million or so Pashtuns in this world and this Kabir Stori is not that important to display his image in the infobox of this article. Ask others and they'll agree with me.--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 18:12, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 November 2014
Dear Admins, I've counted the Pashtun population in Bangladesh and it is over 400,000. I would really like to see my country's name there. Also many Pashtuns back in 1600-1700's migrated to Eastern Bangladesh with their family because of war and stuff. My whole family and my Paternal Grandma's Great-Great-Great-Great Grandpa stayed in Brahmanbaria,Bangladesh because he was a warrior and had to hide. His name was Ali Akbar Mirza Khan. He was from Northern Pakistan and he married a Kashmiri. Thanks Pal, Cheers.

Pashtun Pride from Bangladesh

Realpashtunbhai (talk) 22:42, 30 November 2014 (UTC) Thanks I hope you put Bangladesh's population number too.


 * If you can provide a published reliable source for the number, we can add it. We don't base article content on contributors' own research. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:56, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (e • t • c) 23:15, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Under representation of Pakistani Pashtuns in Famous Pashtuns
Many Pashtuns from Pakistan greater in stature than Karzai have not been represented eg. Khushal Khan Khattak, Pareshan Khattak, Rehman Baba, Ayub Khan, Ghulam Ishaq Khan etc.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.27.230.123 (talk) 10:44, 30 September 2014 (UTC)


 * But Hamid Karzai is very well known by everyone in Pakistan, Afghanistan and the rest of the world. For example, anywhere you go in the world and ask a common person on the street who Hamid Karzai is and they will likely say President of Afghanistan. If you do the same for the guys you listed, they will scratch heads and say I don't know. The guys you listed are popular figures only in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa area. Even neighboring people (i.e. Punjabis, Sindhis, Baloch and much of Afghans) have no idea who they are.--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 21:29, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

but bro, everybody know who was ayub khan, who was younis khan and jansher khan squash champion,,, no body apart from some afghans know who is zalmay khalid or people like him who are in pictures. we need to be impartial but this article seems to belong to afghans not to pashtuns,Rahman baba is known by everyone, hamza shinwari famous poet, ghulam ishaq khan president of pakistan, it seems u can include people like tarzi and zalmay who not even afghan know who they were but u cant include hamza shinwari, and his likes.


 * What do you mean by "everybody"? Ayub Khan was a non-Pashto-speaking Awan (Hindko-speaking). His son claims he and his father do not belong to the Pashtun group. You seem to be biased toward Afghans. Zalmay Khalilzad (without any dispute) belongs to the Pashtun group, he is a globally recognized person who became the first Muslim and first person from the Afghanistan region to become US ambassador. You have a very weird way of thinking. This article does not belong to Pashtuns, Afghans, Pakistanis or anyone else, we follow basic Wikipedia rules in choosing which image is put in the image box and which to remove. It is irrelevant who Afghans know and don't know. The people you named do not have free images.--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 12:48, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

The thing is i mean you. Because you are an Afghan nationalist who does nothing but edit articles according to his own mind. I have cited ayub khan as belonging to tareen tribe of pashtuns and is much more famous than saif ali khan or likes like him. Also younis khan is world class cricket player while you have added muhammad nabi who is just a rookie cricketer. Better be impartial as this will escalate further as what you are showing is that you are correct. in the history of edits it is clearly seen that many people before me have pointed out that we need to add more pakistani pashtuns and pakistani pashtuns are more famous then afghans but seems like thsi article is being controlled by you alone and you wont let anybody add anything in it. Saladin1987 00:45, 23 December 2014 (UTC)


 * okay bro. Ayub khan is already there and as for younis khan remove him and add the cosmonaut abdul ahad mohmand. i think theres enough kings and presidents and it should diversify the gallery. Saadkhan12345 (talk) 08:03, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

No toleration of under representation of Pakistani Pashtuns
Pakistani pashtuns have been greatly underrepresented in this article, it seems its only related to Afghan pashtuns, people like zalmay khalid and other non famous afghan pashtuns have been added but people like hamza baba, rahman baba, ghulam ishaq khan, younis khan, jansher khan etc have been deliberately ignored. instead non pashtuns like shahrukh and salman and even salim khan have been placed, dilip kumar being a hindkowan has been added, but any more partiality will be dealt in the form of reporting. ThanxSaladin1987 00:58, 22 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I very much doubt that trying to report people for not adding content to an article would get very far. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:10, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanx for the prompt response. Its just this guy has been dealing with this article in a very prejudiced manner, this article is ethnic based article and it should keep the names and images of those who are factually proved as pashtuns via family line or blood line and have been cited. He has added the images of those people who merely claim to be pashtuns and are neither nationaly no linguistically pashtun. if you look at the history of the edits of this article you will clearly see many pakistani pashtuns showing their concern regarding their under representation while pakistani pashtuns have got the most population amongst pashtuns. to my surprize is that even indian pathans are more in number than pakistan pure pashto speaking ethnically pashtun people. is pointing out at my blocks, but he fails to understand that those blocks are not recent and were long time ago. My request is that this article should be ethnically related so people like saif ali khan, shahrukh khan, zareen khan who merely have their memories as their proof of being pashtun shouldnt be added to this article. If they are added then pure pashtuns like Ayub khan, Younis khan should be here too. in the history of edits it is clearly seen that many people before me have pointed out that we need to add more pakistani pashtuns and pakistani pashtuns are more famous then afghans but seems like thsi article is being controlled by you alone and you wont let anybody add anything in it. Saladin1987 00:51, 23 December 2014 (UTC)


 * AndyTheGrump, just want to tell you that this is not here to improve articles but rather is vandalizing and destroying them. He is a Pakistani nationalist who is on a crusade removing references to Afghan and Afghanistan from articles of famous people.    This is very disruptive, he has been blocked several times.  The last time for a month, and he's still doing it.--Krzyhorse22 (talk) 12:52, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Can't speak for Saladin but I agree that there need to be more Pakistani Pashtuns on this page. The largest Pashtun population in the world is in Pakistan. It makes sense. Hurvashtahumvata888 (talk) 13:15, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
 * actually pashtuns history goes back quite far and so to say "there needs to be more pakistani pashtuns is not correct" since pakistan came into being in 1947.