Talk:Republican insurgency in Afghanistan

J0urm district?
Yes, it is zero, not an "o". Look it up in the article. Never heard of this district, have You?

Amnesty international report of collective punishment
In 2023, Amnesty International reported on the collective punishment of the civilian population in the Panshir Valley by the Taliban. The NGO documented several cases of extrajudicial mass executions of NRF fighters by the Taliban. In September 2022, the TALiban executed NRF commanders and their sons.

At least three cattle breeders who wanted to drive their cattle into the mountains were tortured and then shot by the Taliban.

https://www.amnesty.de/informieren/aktuell/afghanistan-grausame-angriffe-der-taliban-in-der-provinz-pandschir

--87.150.98.120 (talk) 07:55, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't trust User:Noorullah21
This user is even very open about encouraging people to visit Afghanistan on his user page.Speakfor23 (talk) 12:42, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Citation style for Jamestown Foundation source
Re this diff: In general, citation style isn't that important, and WP:CITEVAR suggests respecting what's already there. So I'm pretty lenient on this. That said, this case is so cut-and-dried I'm not sure why you reverted; "better as it was" is not a reason. This is a short, 5-paragraph article - much shorter than many other web sources already cited routinely. I'm a big fan of sfn, generally when citing page ranges out of entire books, but there's no point in using it to slice up such a tiny article. If everything in the Wikipedia article is citing pages 1-2 of the Zenn article, which they are currently, then... just have a single cite, like every other cite in the article, and use pages=1-2 in the main citation. SnowFire (talk) 15:41, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * There is no reason to be imprecise if one can avoid it. Zenn's article provides page numbers, making it easier for the reader to see which part is the source for what. It does not matter that it's just a few pages. Applodion (talk) 19:03, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * There absolutely is - consistency and concision and avoiding undue weight on this one random source as worthy of setting aside from the rest. If you go find a physical copy of the NYT paper, I'm sure you could cite different page ranges for https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/25/world/asia/panjshir-valley-ahmad-massoud.html, a much much longer article, too - but there's no need, because we can expect the reader to find the relevant part easily enough, using CTRL-F if necessary.  One of the cited page ranges is already to the entire article anyway.  There are times when it makes sense to "chop up" a citation because it's a hefty, dense journal article over 15 pages, and which page is important, but to state again: this is 5 short paragraphs.  It is wild overkill to have a cite to "just" page 2 of such a short article.  SnowFire (talk) 19:17, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * The pdf is 11 pages. Every reader has different time availability - some may wish to only check the specific facts cited, while others will read the source in full. In this case, giving page numbers saves the former type of reader from thinking "I don't have time to wade through 11 pages" and deciding not to check at all. The latter type of reader is not bothered by the page numbers. Boud (talk) 21:29, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Salang Parwan martyrs and Akmal Ameer
there should be some corrections made to the incident report of Akmal Ameer and his people. The other commander with him was Abdul Basir Andarabi. They were meeting after some time and discussing the future. The others with them were close friends and colleagues basically their security detail. All of them were killed in salang after a few hour gun battle with the Taliban. The locals claim Taliban had almost thirty casualties. akmal Ameer was a Brigadier General and commander of all civil affairs and phycological operations for special operations kandaks of the Afghan Army. He is the highest ranking Afghan officer to be killed in combat since the collapse of the Republic 2600:1006:B0C7:7E70:0:3:9756:7A01 (talk) 21:20, 11 May 2024 (UTC)


 * You're clearly talking about the 10-14 April 2023 paragraph. If you have any sources apart from the current three sources, then please give them here. It's not clear what specific change you are requesting (which sentence should be changed? what would the new wording be?) or which source you have used for that requested change to the current text of that paragraph. Please see WP:VERIFIABILITY. Boud (talk) 21:44, 12 July 2024 (UTC)