Template:Did you know nominations/Pashtun colonization of northern Afghanistan
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:45, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Pashtun colonization of northern Afghanistan
edit- ... that Afghan governments since the 1880s have encouraged Pashtuns to settle in northern Afghanistan?
ALT1: ... that Britain supported the Pashtun colonization of northern Afghanistan in order to reduce Russia's influence in Afghanistan?- ALT2: ... that Afghan governments since the 1880s encouraged and sometimes forced Pashtuns to settle in northern Afghanistan?
Created by Futurist110 (talk). Self-nominated at 07:24, 1 May 2016 (UTC).
- I have now reviewed this DYK? nomination: Template:Did you know nominations/Venance Payot. -- Futurist110 (talk) 07:38, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
This article is new enough and long enough. The original and ALT2 hook facts are cited inline and the article is neutral. I am concerned about two sentences which are virtually identical to the source: "... used Pashtun nationalist ideology, land confiscation, discriminatory taxation policies, and forced resettlement that favored the Pashtuns." and "... in the non-Pashtun lands in the north and in the Uzbeks, Turkmens, Tajiks and others in Afghan Turkestan losing their best lands to Pashtun settlers." Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:09, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
- I have now fixed both of these sentences. Futurist110 (talk) 23:06, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. Approving the original hook and ALT2, as I am unable to find support for ALT1 in the sources cited. Good to go. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:04, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
- Good! :)
- Also, though, here is my source for ALT1 here: "Clearly, population transfers of Pashtuns to the north were not just economic, but strategic; Rahman wanted to secure the border against any further Russian encroachment (Tapper, 1983, pp. 235–237). This policy continued well after Abdur Rahman’s time on the throne. For example, in the 1950s Aloys Michel found that the Afghan government had a policy to “encourage” non-Pashtuns to move away from the border with Tajikistan, even as it attempted to develop and populate a district on the river border (Michel, 1959, p. 119). Regarding the strategic use of Pashtunization, Colonel Yate, who coined the term ‘Afghanisation’ and was one of its architects while he was still a Major, wrote in 1893 that “It is only the non-Afghan tribes such as the Maimanah Uzbegs, the Herati Hazarahs and Jamshidis, etc. that have any intercourse or communication with the Turkomans or Russians, and once encircled by Afghans they are safe” (Lee, 1996, pp. 483, 595). The British were to become allies and sponsors of Abdur Rahman’s Pashtunization of northern Afghanistan. The ‘Yate plan’ was for the Pashtuns to dominate the political, social and agrarian life of Afghan Turkestan (Lee, 1996, p. 482). The precedent for the Afghanization (Pashtunization) of Afghan Turkestan for the purposes of defending the frontier was in Herat and Badghis in the west and northwest of Afghanistan. The Russians were using ethnic arguments (e.g., regarding the Turkmen population) to make a claim on the disputed areas in the northwest. Abdur Rahman had attempted to secure the border areas in the early 1880s with Aimaqs. But distrust, and advice from the British, led the Amir to later use his presumably more reliable ethnic kin instead soon after (Tapper, 1983, pp. 236–237)." Futurist110 (talk) 06:20, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, but the source does not specifically state that the policy had British support "in order to reduce Russia's influence in Afghanistan", although it may have implied this. So lets just go with ALT0 or ALT2. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:32, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
- OK; fair enough. Futurist110 (talk) 18:54, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, but the source does not specifically state that the policy had British support "in order to reduce Russia's influence in Afghanistan", although it may have implied this. So lets just go with ALT0 or ALT2. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:32, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
- Also, though, here is my source for ALT1 here: "Clearly, population transfers of Pashtuns to the north were not just economic, but strategic; Rahman wanted to secure the border against any further Russian encroachment (Tapper, 1983, pp. 235–237). This policy continued well after Abdur Rahman’s time on the throne. For example, in the 1950s Aloys Michel found that the Afghan government had a policy to “encourage” non-Pashtuns to move away from the border with Tajikistan, even as it attempted to develop and populate a district on the river border (Michel, 1959, p. 119). Regarding the strategic use of Pashtunization, Colonel Yate, who coined the term ‘Afghanisation’ and was one of its architects while he was still a Major, wrote in 1893 that “It is only the non-Afghan tribes such as the Maimanah Uzbegs, the Herati Hazarahs and Jamshidis, etc. that have any intercourse or communication with the Turkomans or Russians, and once encircled by Afghans they are safe” (Lee, 1996, pp. 483, 595). The British were to become allies and sponsors of Abdur Rahman’s Pashtunization of northern Afghanistan. The ‘Yate plan’ was for the Pashtuns to dominate the political, social and agrarian life of Afghan Turkestan (Lee, 1996, p. 482). The precedent for the Afghanization (Pashtunization) of Afghan Turkestan for the purposes of defending the frontier was in Herat and Badghis in the west and northwest of Afghanistan. The Russians were using ethnic arguments (e.g., regarding the Turkmen population) to make a claim on the disputed areas in the northwest. Abdur Rahman had attempted to secure the border areas in the early 1880s with Aimaqs. But distrust, and advice from the British, led the Amir to later use his presumably more reliable ethnic kin instead soon after (Tapper, 1983, pp. 236–237)." Futurist110 (talk) 06:20, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
per WT:DYK thread, this nomination was pulled from queue for too-close paraphrasing. Please correct. New reviewer needed after correction. — Maile (talk) 12:41, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
Since there is too-close paraphrasing, marking with appropriate icon; we don't want to call for a new reviewer (which is what the red icon does) until the corrections have been completed. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:38, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
- Can you please give me a little more guidance in regards to exactly what I need to fix, though? Futurist110 (talk) 09:25, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
- Indeed, the copyright violation percentage for this article here is a mere 5.7%: https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Pashtun+colonization+of+northern+Afghanistan&oldid=&action=search&use_engine=0&use_links=1&turnitin=0 Futurist110 (talk) 09:30, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
- Can you please give me a little more guidance in regards to exactly what I need to fix, though? Futurist110 (talk) 09:25, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
- The DYK talk page found a percentage closer to 65%; Futurist110, please let us know when you have addressed this problem. We'll expect to hear from you soon. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:40, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
- OK. Also, though, please give me one or two weeks to fix this. After all, I am currently busy with studying for finals and thus unfortunately can't fix this as soon as I would like to. Futurist110 (talk) 19:16, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
- Please give me one more week to do this. After all, all of my finals should be over with in one week. Futurist110 (talk) 01:03, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
- That's fine. Best of luck on your remaining finals! BlueMoonset (talk) 16:05, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
- All of my finals are now over. Thus, I have just finished making my best attempt at dealing with the copyright violations issue for this DYK? nomination of mine. Futurist110 (talk) 01:03, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
- That's fine. Best of luck on your remaining finals! BlueMoonset (talk) 16:05, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
- Please give me one more week to do this. After all, all of my finals should be over with in one week. Futurist110 (talk) 01:03, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
- OK. Also, though, please give me one or two weeks to fix this. After all, I am currently busy with studying for finals and thus unfortunately can't fix this as soon as I would like to. Futurist110 (talk) 19:16, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Close paraphrasing persists, e.g.:
- Article: "all Pashtuns migrating to the north before 1885 had done so involuntarily (usually as a punishment for opposing the policies of the Afghan government)"
- Source: "Before 1885, all Pashtuns migrating to the north had done so involuntarily – and usually as punishment for opposing state policies"
- Article: "In many cases, voluntary migrants to the north had their travel expenses paid for them and were given animals, (permanently) free land, and a three year exemption from paying taxes"
- Source: "In many cases voluntary migrants to the north were provided with travel expenses, animals, free land in perpetuity and a three year tax exemption"
- Article: "Abdur Rahman's policies of encouraging sedentary Pashtuns to settle in northern Afghanistan ended up being more successful than previous forced attempts (especially forced attempts which involved nomads) were"
- Source: " Abdur Rahman’s policies of voluntary migration for sedentary Pashtuns proved to be more successful than previous forced attempts, especially regarding nomads"
Intelligentsium 16:57, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
- It now states this on Earwig's Copyvio Detector: "Violation Unlikely; 9.1% confidence." Futurist110 (talk) 21:07, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
- Original and alt 2 approved. Close paraphrasing issues appear to be resolved. Intelligentsium 22:34, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you very much, Intelligentsium! Futurist110 (talk) 02:20, 14 June 2016 (UTC)