Pashtuns is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Pashtuns is part of WikiProject Pashtun, a project to maintain and expand Pashtun-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.PashtunWikipedia:WikiProject PashtunTemplate:WikiProject PashtunPashtun
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Afghanistan, a project to maintain and expand Afghanistan-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AfghanistanWikipedia:WikiProject AfghanistanTemplate:WikiProject AfghanistanAfghanistan
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology
This article is substantially duplicated by a piece in an external publication. Since the external publication copied Wikipedia rather than the reverse, please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source:
Miller, F. P., Vandome, A. F., & McBrewster, J. (2009), Demography of Afghanistan: Afghanistan, history of Afghanistan, Afghan (name), Pashtun people, Tājik people, Alphascript Publishing{{citation}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
Latest comment: 3 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The current religion section in the infobox includes Shias, Sikhs, and Hindus as Pashtun minorities. The supposed Hindu Pashtuns seem to be an isolated group of a few people who live in India, while the Sikh Pashtuns seem to be a few hundred people in Pakistan. Neither of these groups warrant inclusion in the infobox, as including them presents a misleading image of these groups being significant minorities among Pashtuns. You can find small groups of any religion among most ethnic groups. To compare to other groups - Kazakhs have about 40k Christians according to their Wiki page (a much greater proportion compared to the proportions of Sikhs/Hindu Pashtuns), yet their infobox simply says "predominantly Islam" for religion. Tajiks have 2,600 Christians according to their Wiki page, but the religion infobox lists only Sunni and Shia Islam. Uzbeks have 7k Zoroastrians, but the infobox simply lists "predominantly Sunni Islam".
That said, these groups are notable enough to remain in the article in the religion section, though not in the infobox. I propose changing the infobox to simply list "predominantly Islam", which covers probably about 99.99% of Pashtuns. PatriarchMacbeth (talk) 15:38, 5 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Nooritahir734 As I said, any further reverts would see an ANI report against you, which has been done. It was up to you to discuss your edits a long time ago per WP:ONUS.
You shouldn't have done that, you should have discuss, and if I acted against the consensus, then you could have filed a complaint at ANI, not now. Before that I said that I will discuss on the talk page and I came to a more definite conclusion and reach a consensus and until you do not have a better source than Britannica, sources and materials should not be removed.
And I shouldn't stop editing, which is reasonable and legal by your faulty warning (any further reverts would see an ANI report against you). I have the same right to edit as you do and you should not behave like an administrator. Thank you! Nooritahir734 (talk) 08:16, 5 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
“You shouldn't have done that, you should have discuss, and if I acted against the consensus, then you could have filed a complaint at ANI, not now”
He had every right to revert you and take this to ANI when you didn’t stop edit warring. Per WP:ONUS, the burden is on you to attain consensus. You were supposed to cease from reverting to your preferred edit and take this to the talk page.
“The responsibility for achieving consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content.”
That means you in this case. Your trying to add content that got disputed by another editor, which means YOU have to build consensus, not Noorullah
“ Before that I said that I will discuss on the talk page and I came to a more definite conclusion and reach a consensus and until you do not have a better source than Britannica, sources and materials should not be removed.”
Respectfully, It doesn’t seem that you have a good grasp on how consensus works. You can’t just declare consensus because you think you’re right. You need to actually build it by discussing with the community.
So far you’ve been reverted by multiple editors, and nobody has come forward to support your position. That means you are far from reaching consensus.
Latest comment: 2 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The description of fall of the greko bactrians are for yuezhi tribes which strapo mistook for sakas. You can furthur read on yuezhi and kushan empire pages. This is an important mistake that should be fixed. 178.232.246.100 (talk) 15:08, 15 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
.svg){kind=small}
,_early_1900s,_Central_Africa,_Democratic_Republic_of_the_Congo,_Pende_people,_wood,_fiber_-_Cleveland_Museum_of_Art_-_DSC08700.JPG){kind=small}
