Talk:Ethnic groups in Afghanistan

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Ethnic groups Low‑importance 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. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks: Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks: Meta-tasks: Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project. Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution: Category:Unassessed Ethnic groups articles Category:Ethnic groups articles needing merge action Category:Ethnic groups articles needing infoboxes Category:Ethnic groups articles needing reassessment Category:Ethnic groups articles needing attention Iyer Peruvian people Start an article: Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks. Afghanistan Low‑importance Afghanistan portal 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. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Central Asia Low‑importance Asia portal Ethnic groups in Afghanistan is part of WikiProject Central Asia, a project to improve all Central Asia-related articles. This includes but is not limited to Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Tibet, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Xinjiang and Central Asian portions of Iran, Pakistan and Russia, region-specific topics, and anything else related to Central Asia. If you would like to help improve this and other Central Asia-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ethnic groups in Afghanistan article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Map failure

In the bottom of the map is written "Haraza" instead of "Hazara" and "Balock" instead of "Baloch/Balotch". Ridiculous.. Please fix that! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.217.64.106 (talk) 13:40, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Languages of Afghanistan

Links on Languages of Afghanistan: http://afghanag.ucdavis.edu/country-info/culture-and-working-locally/Man_Afghan_Culture_CWTI.pdf, http://www.outreachstrategists.com/docs/Outreach_Strategists_Understanding_Pashtun.pdf, http://www.tolafghan.com/documents/9/CIAAfghanEthnicLinguisticFinalStatistics_original.pdf, http://pu.edu.pk/images/journal/pols/pdf-files/Naheed-winter2012.pdf, http://mycommonsensepolitics.net/index.php?view=article&catid=63%3Athe-editorial-opinion&id=1617%3Aquittin-time-in-afghanistan&format=pdf&option=com_content&Itemid=5, http://asianhistory.about.com/od/afghanista1/p/ProfAfghanistan.htm. 39.47.84.159 (talk) 16:18, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Original ethnic afghan population ?

There are several claims that there had been an original afghan ethnic group

This ethnic group has lived in that area before the invasion of the indians and arabs.

But i doubt that this ethnic group is so native because there had been many invasions of Russians, mongols and other groups like the Turks or even the Barbarian and Alexander the great before...... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.2.134.104 (talk) 13:55, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Invasions don't replace a group of people, forced migration or ethnic cleansing does which has not happened Afghanistan. The Tajiks are native to Afghanistan and speak an Eastern Iranian language which is also native to this area. Yes there has been migrations of other ethnic groups in the region from invasions like Hazara, Uzbeks,Pashton. Turkmens who mostly settled here in the past 100-500 years. Akmal94 (talk) 06:41, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tajiks also claim nativity in Afghanistan. Essentially, "Tajiks" are decendents of various Persianized Eastern Iranian tribes such as the Bacterians and Sogdians with some Western Iranian (present-day Iran) admixture. (We can also note some Turkic and Pashtun mixture nowadays -- especially in urban cities with large concentrations of other ethnic groups). From my research, both Pashtuns and Tajiks (and their related ethnic groups) have valid claims to nativity in Afghanistan. Ethnic Tajiks have settled in present-day Afghanistan since at least 1000 BC, not just a couple hundred years.

Also, the Taliban (which mainly comprised of ethnic Pashtuns) did execute ethnic cleansing to mainly Hazaras and some Tajiks during their rule in the 90s. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.68.248.164 (talk) 17:55, 11 February 2018 (UTC) <--- sock IP of User:Jamaas9 (see also; [1])[reply]

Afghans(Pashtuns) are not native to the land which is now called Afghanistan. In the time of great Persian empire a nomadic tribe of Jews were given permission to migrate eastward. These were the people of (Afghana) who was the grand son of king Saul of Israel. They settled near the mountain of Suliman in today's Pakistan. They have always lived in tribes which is not native to the population of that area!

 The only original native inhabitants of that land are Persians(Tajiks) within there 7000 years of history. The Land which is today called Afghanistan, was originally part of the Persian empire and only Tajiks(Persians) were living there (The word Tajik has been given to the persians of that area much later ).  Migration of Pashtuns(Afghans) from nearby the Suliman Mountain happened much later.

After the rule of Arabs, also Afghans converted to Islam. Pashto language now contains a large amount of persian and arabic words.

Sorry but Wikipedia isn't a place to spill your anti-Pashtun dribble so please keep that nonsense at Tajikam or in your own head. "Tajik" refers to anyone who speaks Farsi as a first language so it can include anyone, including Farsi speaking Pashtuns of Kabul. 7000 years of history is impossible considering that Afghanistan only has a recorded history of 5000 years. Also please sign of your posts when your done posting otherwise it show's to me your a sock-puppet troll. Also what exactly was the point of your post? If you have no intention of trying to make this article better than don't post your opinion because this is not a forum or discussion platform. Akmal94 (talk) 03:48, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. SdHb (talk) 10:52, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It says the Hazara population are” 6-7” millions in Afghanistan 🇦🇫. This is not true. Pakhtons are 20.6 of the population.

It says the Hazara population are” 6-7” millions in Afghanistan 🇦🇫. This is not true. Pakhtons are 20.6 of the population. Afghan.1919 (talk) 04:51, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

According to the statistics Pashtuns make around 20% - 30% of the population of Afghanistan. Tajiks make up to 35% - 45% of the population and the rest of 30 % is made of other ehtnic groups. From the language point of view 80 % speak only persian. Large amount of pashtuns don't speak pashto at all !

ther was never ever a populations tracking.. due of the war. but Pashtuns make almost 20.6% of the population. én are tajiks (42.9%) hazaras are near 5-9%. we have to focus on or own books and not cia factbooks or iranians who try to claim afghan soil by saying tajiks are 45% and were the originals inhabitants! fuck off iranians

The Hazara people population in Afghanistan

Semi-protected edit request on 6 August 2019

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the section of ethnic group of pashtun, article (some notable pashtuns ) you are mentioning the name of singers (Ahmad Zahir) and (Farhad Daria), This is incorrect! Both are of Tajik ethnicity not pashtun. Please correct it and put these names under Tajik ethnicity. Thank you. Farahmand123 (talk) 18:39, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Highway 89 (talk) 21:33, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ethic group Tajik a native tribe?

I’m from Afghanistan and I know that the Tajik the real owners of this land they are Persian and as we know they have been lived for more than 5000 years and they made newroz or nowruz there have been to many famous people like mawlana balkhi or rumi and he was a Tajik from Balkh province . Actually they are all Persian and we know who ruled the era for more than 3000 years and they divided us and called us Tajik so please make sure that the Wikipedia is not any place for racist or for their own interest. No one can change the history and we all know who the Persians were and who is Pashtun so don’t blame yourself thank you 🙏 Mustafa profissor (talk) 16:45, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CIA map is wrong

Cia map is fake. The balkh and samangan has Tajik majority, . Hisksjueeu (talk) 12:52, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dear, admin please stop uploading wrong map. Hisksjueeu (talk) 11:16, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hazaras

I removed the content and source because it was about the general population of Hazaras, not their population in Afghanistan. Muhmmadaht (talk) 16:32, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Upp

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In India , UP is a good state and its security control by local police . Its call UPP . 27.60.85.40 (talk) 09:01, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 09:40, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnic Groups

Percentage of ethnic groups based on Afghanistan population

1. Tajiks 46.5%

2. Pashton 20.6%

3. Hazara 8%

4. Uzbeks 4%

6. Others 6%

Zaki 26 January 2023, 19:50 AEST

Semi-protected edit request on 17 September 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Firstly Tajik population in text is really underated and shown less on the estimated survey, while there hasn't ever been a absolute truthful survey but still it might give a different first impression to the one whom might be reading it. Secondly many tajik singers and prominent figures are named after pashtun and that is against every law of command, so please put that in the context of tajik people. زلمی یوسفزی (talk) 07:52, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 08:11, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 28 April 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

mainly are tajiks and hazara and aimaq dari is most wildley spoken and second pashto

}} 2601:5CF:4080:A710:280B:42F5:AC26:D564 (talk) 12:27, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 12:30, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sentence structure

Hi guys, raising question about this sentence: 'Farsi is the official language of Afghanistan and Hazaragi is closely related to the Farsi which sometimes their variant is interspersed with many Turkic and a few Mongolic words.' The first clause (part) of it - 'Farsi is the official language of Afghanistan and Hazaragi is closely related to the Dari' - makes good sense on its own. Also the end part of the sentence - 'variant is interspersed with many Turkic and a few Mongolic words' - makes sense on its own. But the way how these two clauses (parts) of the sentence are connected - ie. using the words 'which sometimes their' - is certainly not grammatically correct way of connecting these two clauses, and as a result, the whole sentence doesn't make a good sense. I'm guessing the author of the chapter meant to say something like '...Hazaragi is closely related to Dari but it's more interspersed with Turkic and, to a lesser extent, also Mongolic words.' But that is just my guess - it's possible that the meaning was supposed to be slightly different from how I understand it - but because incorrect English words/grammar were utilized, the intended meaning just doesn't emerge too clearly. Can someone check it and correct the construction of this sentence to give it proper and intended sense? Thank you. LibMat (talk) 04:41, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unreliable source for Pashtun population

This site is not a reliable source per WP:RS, and even the site itself states that it does not take responsibility for the accuracy of its numbers. Additionally, the article cites an older, archived version instead of the current version. This seems to be an obvious attempt to exaggerate the Pashtun proportion. 2A01:71A0:8038:5600:90EE:497F:4698:AB73 (talk) 08:46, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 November 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

There are many factual errors in this article and the sources are not inaccurate. Therefore, I want to edit this article based on credible sources. Sha.azimi (talk) 22:44, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. RudolfRed (talk) 23:18, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong Information

There is not national consensus and statistics to show which ethnic group is the majority 50%, all the information on this page is falls and misleading the reader. 174.95.129.237 (talk) 21:34, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 10 June 2025

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

please add this

{ {Tajiks} }

2405:6E00:63E:31F2:610A:858E:EDFD:EC11 (talk) 04:22, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thepharoah17 (talk) 04:14, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Lengthy and non-productive discussion prior to my 3O involvement. Xan747 (talk) 15:13, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Badakhshan ziba you think you can just delete everything that you claim as false information and get away with it? Maybe have a proper discussion before you delete anything you see as misleading information? Next time you delete sourced information (as you did first!) i will call for vandalism. This is unacceptable behaviour. SdHb (talk) 12:11, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply] Okay, let’s discuss. No problem. After checking the history, I noticed that in June 2023, you extensively vandalized the ethnic data of Afghanistan, in favor of the Pashtuns ethnic group. First, you need to explain why you biasedly changed the ethnic information in June 2023 For the benefit of the Pashtuns؟ The only thing I did was try to revert the information back to March 2023 and add the most reliable sources available. Badakhshan ziba (talk) 20:36, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply] *Sigh* Well, then let's have a look at the accusations. I "extensively vandalized the ethnic data of Afghanistan"? How? By not providing "the most reliable sources available"? What, you mean like the published dissertation at the University of Washington? Or the World Factbook published by the Central Intelligence Agency of the United States? Or the Library of Congress Country Studies which is published by the Federal Research Division of the United States Library of Congress? Or the New York Times, the most important, relevant and price-decorated publication of all time? Or the Encyclopædia Britannica, at his time the biggest encyclopedia in the world? Or the Asia Foundation? Or, or, or, ...? I "need to explain why [I] biasedly changed the ethnic information in June 2023 For the benefit of the Pashtuns؟"? Uhm, where exactly did I do this? I literally only sorted it by year (matching the exact time a regime change happened in the country so to highlight any bias that could have been when a dominant ethnic group was at charge, literally the opposite of what you are accusing me), displayed the average estimation per ethnic group, and added the most recent data available online. There is no bias involded in any of this. Now in contrast, let's have a look what you have provided exactly. You added the Gulf/2000 Project as evidence, which claims numbers that are already shown in the sources I provided, being all in the same range as the other estimates of the pre-2004 and pre-2021 regimes. The Library of Congress Country Studies and the World Factbook are quite literally mentioned as sources in the pre-2004 and pre-2021 estimates. So what is the point of mentioning them separately again? Funnily enough, the only actual bias towards any ethic group can be found in the number of Tajik and Hazara people allegedly making up 58.2% of the population in 2023. Firstly, both sources used in this column have already been used (Gulf/2000 Project, World Factbook) AND again are the from 2002 and 2013, so what's even the point mentioning them here? And secondly, you misused the language one spoke as evidence for their ethnicity, a feat that is intentionally misleading as Dari Persian is used as the first language of many members of other ethnic groups, especially in cities like Kabul, Herat, Ghazni etc. but is NOT the mother tongue of these individuals. This is further evidenced by the very same source that says Pashtuns make up 38.5% but only 33.5% speak Pashto, 6% are Uzbeks but only 5% speak Uzbek, etc. etc. The afforementioned groups according to Gulf/2000 only made up 21.3% and 24.5% of the population in 2002, even if you counts the so called Parsiwans and Tajiks AND Hazaras and Sayyids together. Nothing in your claims adds up. This makes your sources invalid for all the reasons mentioned above and thus I will for the last revert them. However, if you try to change this again, I in fact will call for your ban on editing pages on Wikipedia and report you for vandalism. It's your choice. --SdHb (talk) 12:56, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply] I am from Afghanistan.Unfortunately, in Afghanistan,i know that the Pashtuns and the Taliban government are trying very hard to implement Pashtunization policy and trying to show themselves above 50% by manipulating ethnic statistics. You also had no right to delete all previous statistics and manipulate all ethnic statistics of Afghanistan in June 2023. The statistics should go back to April 2023. Then, if there is an intention to make big changes in the statistics, extensive changes should be made with the opinion of Wikipedia administrators and after discussion . In addition, the Asia foundation did not specify the ethnic statistics of Afghanistan. Rather, it announced the statistics of its interviewers and from what I saw, its interviewee statistics are changing every year and are not considered a source at all. Do not give false information, otherwise you are the one who should be banned from editing Wikipedia. Badakhshan ziba (talk) 18:05, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply] @historyofiran Are you a english Wikipedia admin? Did @SdHb have the right, according to Wikipedia rules, to extensively and deeply change the ethnic information of Afghanistan in June 2023 without discussion? The June 2023 information has undergone extensive changes in favor of the Pashtun people compared to the April 2023 information.please Compare April 2023 data with June 2023. Badakhshan ziba (talk) 18:45, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply] I have re-edited the errors and mistakes to make the information more accurate. As far as I could, I used the most reliable information and sources available about the percentage of the ethnic population in Afghanistan. Sources that are based on surveys or interviews are not reliable about the percentage of the ethnic population in Afghanistan. Badakhshan ziba (talk) 19:28, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply] This is ridiculous, where to even begin ... You try to emotionalize the discussion by appealing to authority when you say "I am from Afghanistan, I know what's going on." Let me be clear: personal background doesn't override sourcing policy. This is an encyclopedia, this is about reliable sources, not a place for original research or your personal observation of some alleged "Pashtunization."(Funnily enough, no one ever talks about any "Persianization" when it comes to ethnic statistics in Afghanistan — even though, as soon as the Tajik-led Jamiat took control over the government, the ethnic composition in the CIA World Factbook was changed from 50% Pashtuns in the edition before to just 38%. Coincidence? Hmm...) Furthermore, what does any of this even have to do with the Taliban right now? Are you seriously implying that I'm supporting them just because I provided a source-based overview of Afghanistan's ethnic composition over the years? You try to distract from the question of why you deleted the last version by claiming I "manipulated the data in favor of Pashtuns" or "deleted all previous information." How is that even remotely true? All of my edits are based on publicly available, well-established sources, like I already mentioned (if you didn’t catch the irony in my previous message): the Library of Congress, the CIA World Factbook, the Asia Foundation (with clear attribution), among others. These are transparent, dated, and properly cited sources. What you said about the Asia Foundation may be true that they don't conduct full censuses. What they do publish, however, is representative survey data with DOCUMENTED METHODOLOGY. Dismissing it outright as "unusable" without offering a comparable alternative is downright laughable. And let’s not pretend your version is somehow "more accurate" just because you say so. Guess what: your favorite source, the Gulf/2000 Project? It also relies on estimates. And best of all, they're older than the ones I included! You reused older data from 2002 and 2013, ignored methodology, and selectively included numbers that suit your particular narrative while dismissing newer, documented sources without justification. That’s not neutrality, that’s cherry-picking. What I also find amusing is how you asked @HistoryofIran about changing things on Wikipedia. Do you really think you need some kind of permission to make edits? Who's the authority here that has to give a thumbs-up before anything changes? Wikipedia does NOT require prior discussion for every single edit, as long as those edits are VERIFIABLE and WELL-SOURCED. If you had concerns about the edits I made in June 2023, you could have brought them up back then. Unilaterally reverting everything back to the April 2023 version, without any discussion or stronger sources, is completely inappropriate. Just to clarify: Wikipedia is built on the "be bold" principle. If edits are verifiable, properly sourced, and follow policy, they don't require permission or prior discussion. There is no such thing as a version being "protected" just because it was added earlier. Also, you haven't said a word about how you TRIED TO MANIPULATE the language distribution as evidence for ethnic breakdown, which in regards to the methodology is indisputably flawed. As I already explained: even your own sources show discrepancies between language and ethnicity. Just because someone speaks Dari as a first language does NOT mean they are Tajik, Farsiwan, or Hazara — especially in the aforementioned multiethnic urban areas! And you are the one threatening me about “not giv[ing] false information” or else I should be banned? Don't make me laugh. To summarize: Nothing you've said gives ANY reason why my sources or methodology aren't strong enough to justify the changes I made. Instead, all you've contributed are straw man arguments, red herrings, and the classic whataboutism. That doesn't work here, buddy, so don't even try. --SdHb (talk) 09:09, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply] I was not aware that you had manipulated the statistics in June 2023 and I have just found out about this. But it is not too late to revert the statistics to their previous state. A review of the changes you made in June 2023 clearly shows sabotage and deliberate manipulation to change the ethnic statistics of Afghanistan. The information should go back to April 2023. The Asia foundation has not announced ethnic statistics. If you have any evidence about this, please provide it. the Asia Foundation has only announced the ethnic statistics of its interviewees in Kabul and some other cities.I checked the ethnic statistics of the interviewees have been constantly changing over the years. Do you know what interviews and surveys mean?? Do you know that you cannot cite this as a source? please Stop making false statistics in favor of the Pashtun people. We know that this is part of the Pashtunization policy that the Taliban government are currently implementing in Afghanistan. Wikipedia is not a place to publish information in line with the Pashtunization policy. Badakhshan ziba (talk) 20:46, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply] The numbers given in the Asia Foundation are among the lowest for the Pashtun population out of any source (as low as 37%) but I guess keeping it makes me complicit of trying to push the Pashtunization policy of the Taliban? Right, interesting ... Also, keep ignoring every evidence that I brought up, further solidifying that you are just not interested in discussing properly. SdHb (talk) 21:15, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply] Afghanistan is a multi-ethnic country. I have made another attempt to to add more detailed and accurate information about Afghanistan's ethnic demographics.The Asia Foundation only conducted a survey in Kabul and some other cities, and this cannot be a source of population statistics for the all entire country of Afghanistan.I believe that the statistics compiled by the CIA World Factbook, the Gulf 2000 Project, and the Library of Congress may be the most accurate and reliable data available on the ethnic demographics of Afghanistan. If necessary,Third opinion Wikipedia admins may need to review and verify this information for accuracy. Badakhshan ziba (talk) 21:42, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply] I won't even comment on this ridiculous attempt of you ignoring all accusations for at least the third time. Let's see what others have to say about it, I started W:3O. SdHb (talk) 22:26, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Both of you need to read WP:NOTVAND immediately and start working together to achieve consensus. If you truly cannot come to an agreement, please see WP:DR. You may want to start with WP:3O. The next one of you who calls the others' edits vandalism or otherwise casts WP:ASPERSIONS will be blocked without further warning. Thank you. -- asilvering (talk) 21:11, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Response to third opinion request:

I note that this dispute was recently reviewed at WP:ANEW where an administrator directed both parties to stop edit-warring and to allow the 3O process to work. Due to the acrimony on display here, I feel it is necessary to set some ground rules and expectations. I am not here to adjudicate past behavior of either editor. Do not discuss it. Address arguments, not editors: "Statement X is incorrect because of Y" is the best path toward reaching consensus in this charged environment. "Your statement is incorrect because" will only further inflame tensions. I may be addressed directly to avoid ambiguity. It's also not bad policy to directly quote X instead of paraphrasing to avoid Strawman fallacy. Each editor will get one warning for violating each of 1 or 2. Second violations will terminate my involvement, and be reported to ANI. Adding or reverting clearly contested content, or any personal attacks whatsoever, will immediately terminate my involvement, and be reported to ANI. Avoid loaded terminology, weasel words etc. If you wouldn't be allowed use certain language in an article, you are strongly encouraged to not use it here. My goal is to facilitate both editors coming to an agreement rather than take a position either editor might disagree with. I retain the option to reevaluate that goal. In consideration of all involved, please avoid WP:WALLSOFTEXT. Because the edits in dispute involve extensive content and sourcing changes, I suggest editors first try to come to agreement on mutually acceptable sources. I ask that each editor provide a ranked list of sources they want to include with brief justifications based on WP:RS policy. Focus on why each source should be included independently, instead of comparisons promoting one editor's preference over the other. Then let me respond before continuing discussion. If my guidelines or proposals are unacceptable to either editor, I will withdraw my involvement and reopen the 3O ticket. I am monitoring this thread and have high availability. I should respond within 24 hours once both editors have completed their initial lists. I will leave a notification here should I need more time. I have made no previous edits on Ethnic groups in Afghanistan and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes. Xan747 (talk) 20:04, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply] Hello Xan747, thank you for trying to help in this case. Let me begin with the sources I used in my version: 1. This dissertation was submitted at the University of Washington and is permanently archived in the official repository of the university. As a dissertation it underwent supervision and review by experts, which means it meets scholarly standards. 2. The Encyclopædia Britannica as the (I quote the Wikipedia article) "longest-running in-print encyclopaedia in the English language" for 244 years is reliable because its articles are written and reviewed by experts and go through strict editorial checks. They provide accurate and well-researched information on ethnic topics which makes this source reliable. 3. The World Factbook is a reliable source because it is published by the Central Intelligence Agency of the United States. The information is compiled by experts and is widely used by researchers, journalists etc. because of its accuracy and consistency. Therefore, the 1981, 1991, 1992 and the 2013 versions are all reliable. 4. The New York Times are a reliable source because they are a well-established and world renowned newspaper with professional editorial standards and fact-checking. The journalistic reports on events in the NYT are based on firsthand accounts, official statements and multiple sources to ensure accuracy, making this source also reliable. 5. The Country Study on Afghanistan by the Library of Congress is a reliable source because it is an official publication of the US government which was made by experts, and intended for public use, which makes the information trustworthy and verifiable. 6. The Concise Encyclopedia of Languages of the World is a reliable source because it is published by Elsevier who are a reputable academic publisher. The entry on Pashto provides well-researched information on the origin, dialects and what not of the language, authored by experts in the field, therefore being reliable. 7. The Worlddata page about Afghanistan is reliable because it compiles data from reputable sources such as the United Nations Population Division, World Bank, the European Commission etc. 8. and 9. The ABC News poll was conducted by the Afghan Center for Socio-Economic and Opinion Research and surveyed 1,534 adults across all 34 provinces, making it a reliable snapshot of public opinion. The same goes for all of the surveyes of the Afghan people by the Asia Foundation, which is reliable because it interviewed 17,812 Afghan citizens across all 34 provinces, providing a nationally representative sample. 10. For the sake of finding a compromise and showing good faith, I would accept the e͟t͟h͟n͟i͟c͟ summary by the Gulf/2000 Project as a reliable source since it is provided by the Columbia University and therefore is a credible academic reference. Premature discussion. Once editors have submitted their lists, next step is for them to attempt consensus on a mutually agreeable list of sources. Xan747 (talk) 15:13, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply] The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. Next, I will address the biggest argument that I have. The statement "Tajiks, Hazaras etc. comprise 58.2% of the ethnic population of Afghanistan" is incorrect because the linked source only points out the "relative share of languages in Afghanistan", specifically not the "relative share of ethnic groups in Afghanistan" which they do in a separate source pointing out that Tajiks and Parsiwans together make up 21.3% of the population and the Hazaras and Sayyids together make up 24.5% of the population. SdHb (talk) 08:59, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply] @SdHb, thank-you. I had asked for a "ranked list" in my instructions, to get a sense from each editor what is most important to the for inclusion. If your list is already in order from least to most important to you, please confirm. Otherwise please order them accordingly. No need to make an entirely new comment, just edit in place. Xan747 (talk) 14:46, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply] Hello @Xan747, I wasn't able to comment sooner since for some reason I wasnn't able to log in to my account. I update my list now and will let you know. SdHb (talk) 20:43, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply] @Xan747 Done. SdHb (talk) 20:47, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Badakhshan ziba: This process should take as long as it needs to, provided there is some timely iterative progress happening. I am therefore concerned that you haven't yet confirmed your intentions to participate. Please do so at your earliest convenience. If we have not heard from you by 31 August 2025 00:00 (UTC), I believe it is more than fair for the other editor to proceed at their own discretion, as that well exceeds the time limits imposed by WP:3RR. Thank you.

@SdHb: Thank for ranking your list of references.

To both editors: In the spirit of good-faith and collaboration, please add to your own lists any sources you are confident the other editor wishes to use, which you would also find acceptable. There is no need to create another response for this, simply edit on top of anything you've previously posted, with an edit note clearly explaining that's what you're doing.

Then please compose a candidate version of your desired content based on your own combined list of references. You can do this offline or online. Either way, once you're ready for it to be reviewed, create a page in your own namespace and link to the specific version of that page you wish to be considered.

Once both editors have completed this process we'll compare the drafts and look for agreement between them. In the interest of keeping this process moving forward, there is no need to wait for the other editor to post a list of their desired sources.

If there are any questions, please post them below. Thanks. Xan747 (talk) 21:40, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Xan747, I have added a source I would be comfortable with to my list.

The next step is to create a page like User:SdHb/Draft:Ethnic groups in Afghanistan#Ethnic composition where I add the version that I want to see in the chapter of the main article?

PS: is it possible to add a text module to the chapter "Ethnic composition" where it shows that the content is disputed?

Thank you. SdHb (talk) 12:03, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes please begin drafting your preferred version of the content. I like User:SdHb/Ethnic groups in Afghanistan (working) a little better for the page name.

You may add the {{disputed-section}} template for entire sections or {{disputed-inline}} for specific content within a section that is otherwise not under dispute. Please be sure to tag all disputed content, not just the stuff you object to. Xan747 (talk) 14:47, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Xan747Done. SdHb (talk) 19:03, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SdHb: I am reviewing this version, which I take to be a candidate for the entire article.

Comments/questions:

1. In both the live and your candidate versions, the lede image Ethnic groups in Afghanistan as of 1997. is nearly 30 years out of date. Typically we want the most recent information available in such a prominent position.

2. Explain why the data table, Fertility Rate in Afghanistan by Ethnic Group (1950-2023), has been removed from your candidate.

3. Explain this diff in the Pashtuns section:

−

The exact numbers vary; according to the Library of Congress Country Studies' estimate of 1996, Pashtuns made up 40%[12][13] More recent estimates vary between 38.5%[14][15]42% [16] and 45%[17] [disputed – discuss]

+

The exact numbers vary; according to the Library of Congress Country Studies' estimate of 1996, Pashtuns made up 40%, while some other estimates from around the 2000s say they make up around 60% of Afghanistan's population.[10][11] More recent estimates vary between 42% in 2013[12] and 52.4% in 2023.[13]

4. Your candidate removes all the following images from the Ethnic composition section:

• A CIA map showing the various Afghan tribal territories in 2005
• Map of Pashto-speaking areas in Afghanistan and Pakistan [date not specified in caption]
• Ethnolinguistic groups in Afghanistan and nearby regions in 1982

5. The data table in the Ethnic composition section in your candidate is titled Ethnic groups in Afghanistan, whereas the live article adds based on alternative estimates to that. Columns in the live article that aren't in yours are The World Factbook, Library of Congress Country Studies, and Gulf/2000 Project. You added Pre-2021, Pre-2004, Pre-1992 and Pre-1973. Both versions have the 2023 estimates based on mother tongue.

The crux of the dispute is obviously #5 and #2. For 5, I would like you to explain the dispute to me by adding it to the Ethnic composition section of your candidate version. That means it must be properly sourced and follow all of the other rules for article content, especially WP:NPOV. Feel free to write as much as you'd like. I suggest you do not treat it as a "controversies" section, but rather one which explains the difficulties in obtaining good population estimates by ethnicity in Afghanistan. Whether all of that will be WP:DUE to include in the actual article remains to be seen, but the article could certainly use a scholarly treatment, properly cited, of the arguments going on in this talk page. This is a suggestion only, you don't need to do it, but I am hoping you see why I think it will be beneficial.

Let's defer #2 for now. Quick answers to all the others can be made here, but I expect they will also get folded into your response to #5.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Xan747 (talk • contribs) 00:32, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Xan747, this particular version is almost the same as the one before the first major change by Badakhshan ziba was made. I haven't put much effort yet into changing the rest of the article (besides the point that the topic of fertility rate is obviously much more relevant to be placed within the article "Demographics of Afghanistan") and concentrated on the estimates of the ethnic groups in general.

To draft the whole article one has to put much more nuance into it. For starters, there is missing a very important section: the history of ethnicities in Afghanistan since this is an often overlooked but nevertheless relevant topic in the ongoing debate. Clear-cut boundaries as one knows it in western societies simply didn't exist in Afghanistan and it is still widely debated whether they can be found today or are just a mere political construction (see [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]). This would require the reshaping of the whole article (alongside updating images, information on ethnicities etc. in the article) which I would suggest to do in a following step.

In this particular case I would focus on the section that was debated in the first place. Would that be fine with you? For that I would edit the section in my candidate version (also I'm not quite sure what "#5 and #2" are referring to since in your comments/question I see "2." twice but no "5."). SdHb (talk) 06:28, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Xan747 Done. SdHb (talk) 07:15, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]