User talk:Officer

Welcome to the Commons, Officer!

First steps tutorial Our first steps help file and our FAQ will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy. You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing here and assume good faith for the intentions of others. This is a wiki - it is really easy. Getting help More information is available at the Community Portal. You may ask questions at the Help desk, Village Pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons. You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.		Goodies, tips and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your Graphics abilities. All your uploads are stored in your personal Gallery Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~ Use the CommonSense tool to find good categories for your files (then other people can find them too!) To link to an image page, write this: [[:Image:Foo.jpg]], it makes this: Image:Foo.jpg If you're copying files from another project, be sure to use the CommonsHelper Made a mistake? Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|Correct name}} For more information read the full Deletion guidelines
(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

Category labels

THANK YOU so much for your help with categorizing some of my maps. :) Rarelibra 17:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

No problems!--Executioner 23:12, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Request

Please do not place warnings on other users pages of the sort that you just placed on Jeff's page. Commons has to operate in a collaborative manner with people getting along. The message you placed was unhelpful. I personally see no distinction between any users who work together on Commons, however for your information I am an administrator. Thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:17, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok - let's say I found the tone of your message lacking civility. Reviewing your talk page I see you remove warnings - on a number of wikis as a user and as a sysop I have warned people not to do that and indeed blocked them for doing so. When I placed my original message here I was tempted to revert the page to include the talk page messages however I judged that you might re-act to that and preferred to take a lighter approach.

However talk page warnings should not be removed. They can be archived by all means, I guess after a reasonable period of time they can be deleted but by that I would mean after a matter of two or three months in my opinion. However I would stress that had I seen you removing the warning then I would have done as Jeff did whether a sysop or not. Admins are not the "police" to be reported to, they are ordinary users who do a bit of housekeeping work tidying up and most of it can & is done by ordinary users.

If you really want your actions of removing warnings to be put in front of the community (not just the admins) then fine but given this warning it might be wise to consider your actions first. I stress - Commons is a collaborative wiki, there are some great people here, however those who disrupt it by decided for themselves what they and others can or can't do are working outside the spirit required. Thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 15:16, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

The warning I recieved did not make any sense because it was not about my edits. The warning was in regards to what I was typing in another discussion, in which one (1) administrator found it disruptive. Other administrators did not agree with him/her. I respect everyone here, same way I respect my self. However, I am a person who believe that no other user should be allowed to mess with other people's talk pages, that is a very sensative thing. Some people here do not want to reveal who they are, while others want to. So we should respect both types of people. For example, if somebody types my personal information on my talk page, does that mean I have to leave it there? My talk page had false warning, it was just one person's opinion, and they may be wrong for placing that warning there in the first place. Same way how you found my warning on Jeff G's talk page. I agree we should all act like members here instead of enemies. I don't mind keeping history on my talk page, but I believe it holds no importance. why make people read lots of unimportant writings when we can help them read something more important. It's a shame, when I read other people's talk pages, usually all I see is people fighting one another. I guess in time we all will just learn to adjust and make this place more fun and peaceful.--Executioner 15:41, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok - I guess two wrong things don't make something right though. Personal information can certainly be removed - I agree completely - I am a fairly anonymous editor compared to some & I certainly respect that. I also strongly dislike the fighting that seems to occur. We are not as different as you might think. However I guess I prefer something as polite as I can, that said we all have good days & bad days!

The only thing I think we do not agree on is your absolute control of you talk page. Believe me some junk arrives on mine on a number of wikis (I currently have a vandal regularly playing with my talk page - his edits get removed but they are in the history). Maybe I'll say "consider my views" and I'll do the same with you?! Thanks for your time --Herby ^{talk thyme} 15:50, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Your views are fine with me, I hope other users learn this as well. That's a nice way to end this, I enjoyed your discussion and thanks.--Executioner 16:05, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Agreed! Take care --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:34, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

About Afghanistan

Why do you have to remove a picture of two Afghan women with burqa? It should be there. The burqa is very usual in Afghanistan and very usual in the Afghan community. If you just get it back. Tabasco 14:24, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I added a better image of burqa (the one with Kabul police and Afghan woman walking on the street). Burqas are not only worn in Afghanistan but in huge areas of Pakistan as well. We need to show background with burqa women to show that it is Afghanistan and not Pakistan. Besides, the section in the gallery is about "people" in general, not about clothes. This may sound silly but it's possible that a foreigner person (man or woman that is not Afghan) can hide themselves inside the burqa, then they would not be people from Afghanistan.--Executioner 14:35, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I know and I understand. Alright, let's do that so keep it there you already added. Tabasco 15:20, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

With apologies

This is literally the only edit I will be making for around 36 hours at least as I will be away from computers. I suggest you try another admin or the admin boards - sorry --Herby ^{talk thyme} 07:27, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Paintings by Tapand

Image deletion warning

Paintings by Tapand have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these images, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. If the files are up for deletion because they have been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the files may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new files. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

— Xavier, 21:15, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Grand Mosque of Kabul

It is not known as Abdul Rahman Mosque (see here where you mistakenly categorized it). Just thought I'd point that to you. -- Le Behnam 06:35, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

No! I think it's you who is mistaken. The Mosque is named Abdul Rahman, after an Afghan Minister who was assassinated few years back.--Executioner 00:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Source please. Any link will do. -- Le Behnam 17:17, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I will look around if I find it, you should know that the mosque is not even completed yet so we have to wait until it is completed which will be very soon. I saw a latest picture of it and most work was completed. Also, you should realize that every mosque carries its own name.--Executioner 19:48, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Your naming of images

Please be more careful, neutral and avoid controversial and even incorrect terms when uploading images. For example, you named this image Afghan boy. However, that boy is a Hazara, Uzbek or Turkmen. To avoid the ambiguity you should have named it Young boy with pink balloon in Afghanistan.jpg. As an ethnic Pashtun, you should know the meaning of Afghan. Try to use the most neutral name for the image. Please keep this in mind in the future. Dera manana. -- Le Behnam 17:16, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Another example is [Image:Afghan Nomads from the early 20th century.jpg this]. These are Turkmen nomads that even go back and forth the border with Turkmenistan. They are not Afghan, they are Turkmen. -- Le Behnam 17:30, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of their ethnic background, all the citizens or nationals of Afghanistan are to be called Afghans. Uzbeks are nationals of Uzbekistan and Turkmen are from Turkmenistan. The first one (Image:Young_Afghan_boy_with_pink_balloon.jpg) does not indicate he is Hazara, Uzbek, or Turkmen. What if his father was Pashtun and his mother Uzbek or other? In this case we only use a more broader term, nationality name, which like I said is Afghan. You are also mistaken, Afghan does not mean Pashtun it means anyone from Afghanistan. The second one (Image:Afghan Nomads from the early 20th century.jpg) are Afghans because the image itself has "Afghan Nomads" written on it by its author.--Executioner 19:43, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I think you are aware that there is controversy over the usage of this term and I think you know that ethnic Afghans are Pashtuns (eg. that is why Pashtun nationalists have the idea of "Loy Afghanistan" or "Pashtunistan", or why Daoud Khan, Zahir Shah, etc gave out free citizenships to Pakistani-Pashtuns). The controversy and ambiguity is why we should use neutral file names. -- Le Behnam 23:38, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

File:Tajik refugees in 1994.jpg

Tajik refugees returning from Afghanistan in 1994 back to their nation, Tajikistan.

We are living in modern times and in modern times people are recognized by their nations (nationality), not by their ethnics, tribes, clans, race, color, culture, etc. Free citizenship? show me proof to this because I never heard of this. That's paranoia thinking, Pashtuns claim that most of the Tajiks in Afghanistan (especially the ones living in Kabul) came from Tajikistan after Soviet Union invaded their nation and they settled in Kabul to avoid becoming communists. That picture is clear proof. We can't go by this type of thinkings, all ethnic groups who are citizens of Afghanistan are to be called Afghans, like it or not, that's how things work. You're trying to legitimize the 28 million Pashtuns from Pakistan to be called Afghans, which means you want to give them Afghan citizenship. You should face reality that from 1979 to now (almost 30 years) Tajiks, Hazaras, Uzbeks and Turkmen lived in Pakistan with no problems because Pashtuns of Pakistan stood up for them against Punjabi dominated government to allow them to stay in Pakistan with respect and dignity [1], and now they have legal identification cards (ID cards) issued to them and they can live, work and travel without fear from the law.--Executioner 23:50, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it's true. I'll show you some articles on this. Daoud Khan not only gave them citizenship, he also took the scholarships given from Western countries and gave it to these Pakistani-Pashtuns. Ironically, these Pakistani-Pashtuns did not come back and do anything for Afghanistan.

The fact that we are even discussing this shows that it's a controversial and ambiguous term. We should go with the most neutral names. When you have a choice between two terms and one of them is more neutral, obviously by rule of thumb on Wiki we automatically go by the more neutral naming. So please try to follow that. -- Le Behnam 03:14, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

UN photographs

Hi. I wanted to ask you to please stop uploading images from the UN photo library. Their terms of use are explicitly unacceptable to Commons licensing. You've uploaded a number of these images, for example Image:Mohammad Khatami and Kofi Annan at the UN in 2006.jpg [2] and Image:Kofi Annan and Hamid Karzai in 2006.jpg[3]. I'm sure this was an oversight on your part, and I just wanted to inform you so that further images are not uploaded from this site since the license is not acceptable. We'll be deleting these images from Commons shortly. If you have any questions about this, please feel free to ask me. I'm at your service. All the best, --Durin 00:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Could you please explain more fully?

I got your note.

Of course I am committed to following policy, consensus, and conventional practice. I gather, from your note, you are concerned that I am not following one of the above?

Is there any way you could see your way clear to providing help in understanding where you think I am lapsing? Specific examples of a few instances you regard as errors would be helpful.

Is there any way you can see your way clear to providing pointers to the specific documents, or discussions upon which your concern is based would be helpful Document that you think would spell out how to comply would be helpful. -- Geo Swan 16:43, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

It was not a big deal, the images you uploaded contained excessive categories and I just wanted to remind you not to revert my fixings.--Executioner 23:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:WikimediaCommonsUserExecutioner'sGirl.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:WikimediaCommonsUserExecutioner'sGirl.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Your {{Copyvio}} claim

I strongly dispute your removal of the {{PD-USGov-Military}} tag from Image:Omar Khadr getting battlefield first aid.jpg. Geo Swan 19:29, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I left a question on the village pump about your argument that the image should be suppressed because children use the commons. Geo Swan 20:21, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't care what you think, the photo does not belong to the US Military or US Federal Government, unless you can show 100% clear evidence. Just because you see western soldiers in photos doesn't mean you can tag it with US military or US Gov. Family of Omar Khadr also do not own the photos that were taken by the Press agencies. And stop uploading sick images where they show humans in such awful conditions. Are you one of those anti-Islam and targeting Muslims? I say that beause you are uploading the ugly images of Muslims and the good ones of western soldiers.--Executioner 17:49, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I urge you to be more civil

Go ahead, go request a checkuser. Can Sherurcij and I anticipate a handsome public apology from you when you find we are two separate individuals? If so I would like one full, handsome apology for each forum where you accused us of being sockpuppets.

There are times I suspect some of my correspondents might be sockpuppets. But since I was accused of being a sockpuppet prior to suspecting any of my correspondents of being a sockpuppet I have always stopped short of the kind of accusations you launched against Sherurcij and I.

Things that trigger my concern a correspondent could be sockpuppet? New users who started citing wiki policies, and participating in new page patrol, recent changes patrol, or who started participating in the deletion fora, within days of creating the ID.

There can be legitimate reasons for this situation. So, what do I do? I leave as civil a note as I can, explaining what gave the appearance of possible sockpuppetry. I explain I understand there could be a legitimate explanations, like that they abandoned an old ID because they were being harrassed by a persistent wiki-stalker. I ask them to put a note, on their talk page, with an explanation of their atypical contribution history, as a courtesy to those who know the warning signs of sockpuppetry.

You told me, three weeks ago, that you regard yourself as a very polite person. Well, Wikipedia:ATA, don't call other people "stupid". Don't state that other people's arguments are stupid. Don't state or imply that other contributors are stupid solely because they don't agree with you. We are all human. We all make mistakes, even if we are careful.

I urge you to try harder to be civil. I urge you to be open to the possibility you will prove fallible. I urge you to openly and graciously own up when you realize you have been mistaken.

It is a lot less embarrassing to acknowledge a mistake when you don't make bold, bald assertions. You wrote many assertions that the Khadr image was taken by a reporter. And you made one statement where you said it was "probably" taken by a reporter. That is wiser. I have been following Khadr's case for the last three years. There haven't been any accounts that mention reporters. Some of the articles quote the participants. If any of the witnesses were reporters every article that quoted eyewitnesses would quote that reporter.

Did I say that I was skeptical that the DoD had the policies you claimed? Did I say that I was skeptical that the DoD had the policies you claimed in a public place? No. I may have been skeptical. But why gamble? It is unnecessary for me to go out on a limb and gamble you can't find those rules. I can just ask you for the URL of the rules. That is less embarrassing for you, if you have to acknowledge you can't find one, and it is less embarrassing for me if it turns out you had the link handy all along.

You have been behaving badly, making insulting accusation, in public. I am admonishing you, in the relative privacy of your talk page, as a courtesy.

I am going to repeat that I urge you, in the strongest possible terms, to make a greater effort to be civil.

Candidly Geo Swan 18:20, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Geo Swan, stop spreading falsehood on my talk page

User:Geo Swan, please stop making false accusations towards me...I stated: "You sound like an "intelligent" person to me..."[4] and you wrongly accused me of calling you "stupid". I think you are just trying to obfuscate the situation here by trying to start unessary edit-war with me instead of focusing on the main issue, which is to determine wheather or not the images you've uploaded qualify for deletion or be tagged with a true and correct license. From my understaning, you're obviously uploading images with false licenses, you can't provide correct licenses to the images that you have uploaded, and it's upto to the administrators to decide if they want to delete or keep them. So please do not bother me on my talk page this way, by expressing your ill feelings towards me, take your argument to the deletion request page. Learn to relax a little while you're at it, and also, tell your buddy Sherurcij (which I suspect to be your sockpuppet) to stop calling me ignorant for no reasons [5], let others decide who the ignorant person is. The fact is we're are trying to fix the license information on some of the images you've uploaded and to determine if they are copyvio or not. There is nothing you can do if they are copyvio and they will be deleted.--Executioner 22:12, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Misconceptions

I dispute I am "spreading falsehoods" about you.

I am very concerned that you are not responding to the intellectual points made by those who disagree with you. Your repetition of assertions that others have debunked give the unfortunated appearance that you are responsing without really reading your correspondent's comments.

Before you repeat what just about every other correspondent has tried to tell you are misconceptions I urge you, in the strongest possible terms, to read the links in my latest reply to you. Geo Swan 11:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

You may dispute all you want but I've shown evidence above and already made my point clear. Let administrators decide if your uploaded images should be deleted or not.--Executioner 21:50, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry

I hate sockpuppetry and I deeply resent your repeated public accusations that I was a sockpuppet of User:Sherurcij.

I am going to repeat I think you owe Sherurcij and I a full and unequivocal apologies for this baseless accusation.

I don't understand why you shouldn't make a full and unequivocal apology in every forum you made this baseless accusation. You did claim to be a very polite person, didn't you? Geo Swan 11:14, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I only accused you once about you being a possible sockuppet of Sherucij and I haven't changed my mind about that. I have unlimited time to file a checkuser on you. I will not apologize because what if it turns out that I'm right about you? You may think of me as a non polite person but that will not change my attitude or character.--Executioner 05:06, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

1. I am going to file checkuser on you and it will prove that you are a sockpuppet.
   • This is not a suggestion. It is a flat out accusation. Geo Swan 13:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
2. (I'll gather evidence soon)
   • The tag you applied expands to:

It is suspected that this user may be a sock puppet or impersonator of Geo Swan. Please refer to {{{evidence}}} for evidence.

I urge you to do the responsible thing, and apologize. Candidly Geo Swan 23:21, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Your challenges

I don't know if you now realize that your copyright challenges are based on misconceptions on how copyright works.

I uploaded Image:48-tentcity.standalone.prod affiliate.56.JPG today. If you go to the source page you will see it explicitly credits the Department of Defense. I am directing this to your attention now, because I would prefer you not challenge it after the Miami Herald retires it from their recent slideshows.

FWIW, you do upload some good images. Geo Swan 04:24, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I didn't make rules on how copyright works, the rules are already there for everyone to read. Just want to remind you that Administrators usually go by the copyright rules and not by vote counts. Thanks!--Executioner 05:14, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I understand you didn't make the rules. But let me ask you to consider how it reflects on you, when you state an interpretation of copyright, that is at odds with the interpretations of practically everyone else's, and your responses suggest you didn't bother to read the documents that rebut your interpretation -- but simply keep asserting your interpretation -- as if it was an established fact, and the documents that addressed the details didn't exist? Geo Swan 13:17, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

re Ahmad Zahir

That article quotes a man off the streets of Kabul. Some random guy off the streets of Kabul is not reliable source. There is a lot of controversy over his ethnicity.

Me personally, I think his father was Pashtun and his mother Tajik, though others say different things. Le Behnam 19:42, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

He was an ethnic Pashtun who sang mostly in Dari (Persian language). Accept facts and learn to live with them.--Executioner 21:52, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

According to who? You? Stop making things up as you are doing with al-Afghani. Give me a reliable source and then I'll accept it (a man off the streets of Kabul does not count just because it is used in a news article). Le Behnam 22:24, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

According to Amy Waldman of the The New York Times.--Executioner 01:00, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

By the way, I am not claiming him as Tajik. I'm pretty sure his father was Pashtun and his mother was Tajik and they were from Laghman (which wouldn't make him Pashtun). But let's not claim him as any ethnicity, he never in his entire career mentioned his ethnicity so there is a lot of speculation on it. I think it's best not to categorize him in ethnicity since he was probably mixed anyway. Le Behnam 22:29, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Even by your account he is Pashtun. You must learn how ethnic works. I don't feel like going into details about how genes work but it's the father's side that counts. If someone who's father is Pashtun and his mother is other, then the person is Pashtun.--Executioner 22:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

re

I am not edit warring, you are. I am providing edit summaries which make sense, yours don't make any sense.

If people are categorized by nationality only then why is there a Pashtun category and why are you claiming everyone as Pashtun?

If you want to use Tajikistani I don't mind, but open a new category for it, Tajik is also an ethnicity just as Afghan/Pashtun is and Afghanistani is the nationality.

The people of Tajikistan decided to call themselves Tajikistanis not Tajiks. They want to be recongized as Tajikistanis even if thought majority are ethnic Tajiks.--Executioner 22:35, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

No, Tajiks call themselves Tajiks and non-Tajiks call themselves Tajikistanis. Unlike Afghanistan's government, Tajikistan's government is reasonable and allows non-ethniTajiks to keep their identity and does not impose the name Tajik on everyone (as Afghan is imposed on everyone in Afghanistan). If there are images of Uzbeks, Russians, Khyrgiz, etc in Tajikistan, you can call them Tajikistani. But if they are ethnic Tajiks just call them Tajik. Le Behnam 22:46, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Like I said you have personal issues. According to the CIA country report, all citizens of Tajikistan are refered to as Tajikistanis. If you wanna call yourself Afghanistani or Tajik, who is stopping you?--Executioner 22:49, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

my idea

I think we should stop being at odds with eachother as we were on the EnWiki. Let's cooperate here on Commons.

I don't mind if you want to promote your Pashtun pride here on Commons, but please don't make false claims with no bases on al-Afghani.

Let's cooperate with each other and everything will be fine. Otherwise it's wasting both of our time.

You assume that I am Pashtun nationalist. I may not be one of those, I am trying to help put things in order wheather it's Afghans or people from any other country. Just because I upload images of certain people doesn't mean I'm in love with them. It means I'm just helping those people. I am not against your race or ethnic group. The fact is that this Afghani dude was from eastern Afghanistan and his ethnic background can't be other than Pashtun. Sayed Jamal-ud-in Al-Afghani is a very popular name among the Pashtuns in that region especially, where he comes from.--Executioner 22:41, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

According to Britannica and Iranica he was born in Iran. Why can you not accept this? They even have his legal birth documents in Iran. PLease be reasonable and let's go by what schoarly sources say. If you disagree with Britannica and Iranica please contact them and tell them to change their article. Le Behnam 22:49, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

First of all, britannica and iranica are not free of errors and they themselves say this. Secondly, I am not concerned about his location of birth but about what his ethnic background is. An ethnic Pashtun being born in Iran is an ethnic Pashtun. He himself claimed he was an AFGHAN so we have to go by at least what he claimed.--Executioner 22:52, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, he claimed he was Afghan and that is what Britannica and Iranica say (that he was lying). It is extremely unlikely that both of these two top encyclopedias are wrong, but if you think they are wrong please contact them and convince them. Le Behnam 22:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

His claim is more valueble than the person who wrote the article in Britannica. According to that editor of Britannica, Al-Afghani was born in Asadabad, Persia, it doesn't say or mention Iran. Asadabad is located in the en:Kunar Province of Afghanistan. It's very much possible that the person who wrote the article mistakenly thought Asadabad, Afghanistan, being part of Persia. This is a common error many people make because they don't know much about the area. We know that Al-Afghani was deported from Persia so that explains that he was not citizen or native of Persia. It indicates that he was a foreigner to Persia because citizens of Persia could not be deported. Al-Afghani is recognized as a very popular person and is buried in Kabul, Afghanistan.--Executioner 09:32, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I see you have been uploading some pictures of People of Tajikistan. However you've made several mistakes in calling ethnic Tajiks Tajikistani. I agree with you calling those Russian boys and the Uzbek woman Tajikistani, but please call ethnic Tajiks as Tajiks. Thanks. Le Behnam 07:20, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

How many times must I explain to you that we use people's nationality here. Also, the people and government of Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Pakistan decided to call themselves Tajikistanis, Uzbekistanis and Pakistanis. The people of Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan and Balochistan, however, are called Afghans, Turkmen, Kazakhs and Baloch.--Executioner 17:06, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but there is also ethnicity called Uzbek and Tajik. If we know it is an ethnic Uzbek or Tajik we can just say Uzbek or Tajik. That is why if you do a search for "Tajikistani" you only get 40,000 results while you get several million for "Tajik".

I said we give these people in the images names according to what country they are from, not according to what ethnic background or tribe they may be from. See Category:People by country--Executioner 06:12, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

The people of Afghanistan never decided to call themselves Afghan. That was decided for by the foreign supported monarchy, later Communist supported governments, and today people are to ignorant to know they are not Afghans due to a lack of education. That will however change as more books and internet and information becomes available to non-ethnic-Afghans. Le Behnam 23:03, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Most things you say is considered nonsense and untrue. The constitutions of Afghanistan state that every citizen of Afghanistan shall be called AFGHAN.

• Chapter 1, Article 4, of the 2004 Constitution of Afghanistan states: "National sovereignty in Afghanistan shall belong to the nation, manifested directly and through its elected representatives. The nation of Afghanistan is composed of all individuals who possess the citizenship of Afghanistan. The nation of Afghanistan shall be comprised of Pashtun, Tajik, Hazara, Uzbek, Turkman, Baluch, Pachaie, Nuristani, Aymaq, Arab, Qirghiz, Qizilbash, Gujur, Brahwui and other tribes. The word Afghan shall apply to every citizen of Afghanistan. No individual of the nation of Afghanistan shall be deprived of citizenship. The citizenship and asylum related matters shall be regulated by law."
• According to the Constitution of Afghanistan (1990), Chapter Three -- Citizenship, Basic Rights, Freedoms and Dutirs oF Citizens -- Article Thirty Three: Every individual having citizenship of the Republic of Afghanistan in Accordance with the law shall be called Afghan.

See more older constitutions which basically says the same as above.

• Constitution of Afghanistan (1987)
• Constitution of Afghanistan (1976)
• Constitution of Afghanistan (1964)
• Constitution of Afghanistan (1923)

I think you're here to push for political propaganda. This is the wrong place for such things.--Executioner 06:12, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I'm aware of what the constitution says. But as I said already no one asked non-Afghans what they want to be called, the term is imposed on them. And the people that impose this term at the same insist that Afghan=Pashtun, such as yourself claiming that al-Afghani was Pashtun because Afghani=Pasahtun.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Le Behnam (talk • contribs) at 18:21, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

No one asked? In modern times Afghan is citizen of Afghanistan. There are 30 million Pashtuns (twice the number of Pashtuns in Afghanistan), who are natives and citizens of Pakistan, and they are NOT AFGHANS but Pakistanis. I claimed that Al-Afghani WAS Pashtun because during the 1800s and prior, Afghan refered to anyone who was from Pashtun territories. Nuristanis, Hindkowans, Chitralis, and other smaller groups were also called Afghans. Even Baloch were sometimes called Afghans. Anyway, we are using modern terms here in Commons such as Afghan=Afghanistan's citizen, Pakistani=Pakistan's citizen, Tajikistani=Tajikistan's citizen, Uzebekistani=Uzbekistan's citizen.--Executioner 02:19, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

The name "Afghan" was never imposed, it was given to the citizens of a nation called "Afghanistan". If someone is born inside Afghanistan then they would be a citizen of Afghanistan, an Afghan. The name "Afghanistan" itself means "land of the Afghans". Since Pashtuns are also known as ethnic Afghans, that's why ethnic Afghan is no longer recognized or accepted and instead ONLY Pashtun is used today. This is done for several reasons, one of which is the division of Pashtuns between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Also the fact that Afghanistan contains many non-Pashtun citizens today. According to the most popular belief, the ethnic Afghans (or ethnic Pashtuns) have lived on this land for 1,000s of years. The other ethnic groups came from else where and settled in this land. That explains why non-Pashtuns accepted the term "Afghan".--Executioner 17:02, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Tashkent is in Uzbekistan so that shows how little knowledge about Tajikistan. Their ethnicity is clear, in Tajikistan anyone who is Cacasoid and a Persian-speaker is a Tajik.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Le Behnam (talk • contribs) at 17:07, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes minor error, the photograpger been to Tashkent and Dushanbe both and the name of the capital was not that important in my statement. There are Russians and others with black hair who look just like ethnic Tajiks. There is no indication what language the people in the images speak so don't talk about language here.--Executioner 02:19, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

You should take your own advice and stop labelling people by ethnicity when it is not clear like you are doing with Ahmad Zahir.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Le Behnam (talk • contribs) at 17:07, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I only added Pashtun category to his image after his ethnic backgound was established. I didn't name his file as Pashtun Ahmad Zahir or such. I named it as Image:Ahmad Zahir of Afghanistan.jpg and I believe that is a perfect name for him because there may be 100's of other Ahmad Zahirs from different places on earth. Anyway, Ahmad Zahir was an ethnic Pashtun and here is one of the proofs. You reject the truth everywhere and that's your problem.--Executioner 02:27, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I think you had Dushanbe in mind. Dushanbe is by far predominately Tajik. Uzbeks and Khyrgiz live in the countryside.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Le Behnam (talk • contribs) at 18:21, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Predominately does not mean totally or completely. There are non-Tajiks also living in the city, so when you see people in Dushanbe's streets and markets they may be from any ethnic backgound. Some may be a mixture of several ethnics, this is very normal in all societies. Unless it is revealed or shown, you are not allowed to give people ethnic names just because you may want them to be included in a certain ethnic group.--Executioner 02:19, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Yet on the al-Afghani image you insists that Afghan=Pashtun and Pashtun=Afghan. So which is it? Is Afghan meaning Pashtun or citizen of Afghanistan? It cannot be both by laws of logic. Also, stop speculating on the al-Afghani image. Either provide a source, commons doesn't work through speculation (no original research). Le Behnam 20:53, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

The answer to that depends on the time period between modern day or the past. Historically, Afghan was an ethnic and geographical term used by the Persians and Hindus (or Hindustanis) to refer to all the people living between the Hindu Kush in the north and Indus river in the south, a very large region that is inhabited by ethnic Pashtun people. Today, the name Afghan is used for all the citizens of Afghanistan whether it be Pashtun, Tajik, Hazara, Uzbek, Turkmen, Baloch, Aimak, Pashai, Nuristani, etc.

• According to The British Library - The world's knowledge: Afghans (1) An ethnic group: the Pushtun tribes inhabiting the area roughly lying between the Hindu Kush in the North and the Indus in the South; Pathans. Comes to mean Pathans residing in Afghanistan. Divided into two main groups, the Abdalis (qv) and the Ghilzais (qv). The predominant ethnic group in Afghanistan. (2) Any inhabitant of Afghanistan (modern meaning, probably not earlier than 19th century).
• Also see en:Afghanistan#Etymology

The 28 million or so Pashtun citizens of Pakistan are not recognized as Afghans anymore although some still call themselves ethnic Afghans. Legally speaking, they may call themselves ethnic Afghans but they cannot claim Afghan citizenship because they are citizens of Pakistan. In some cases a source does not have to mention the word Pashtun in order to be used as proof of someone being an ethnic Pashtun. When it comes to Al-Afghani, we have to go by the historical meanings and at that time Afghan and Pashtun were synonyms. Al-Afghani was telling the world with his name that he was not Persian or Hindustani but an Afghan, which meant Pashtun at the time. I don't think Iranians or Indians claiming him as one of theirs. Al-Afghani is burried in Kabul, Afghanistan. Therefore, it is safe to add Category:Pashtuns to his image and I've provided more than enough convincing evidence on this topic. You are NOT ALLOWED to remove the Pashtun category unless you provide convincing evidence that says he was not Pashtun, and I think I'm being totally fair here.--Executioner 05:02, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Appreciate your edits Sherurcij 21:24, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

reverse DNS

How do you know User:99.237.217.67 is from Toronto?

Reverse DNS shows the HQ of his ISP is in Toronto. But that ISP provides service across Canada.

Yes, it would be unusual for someone to use their IP if they had a regular wiki-id. Remarkable, in fact. But, you realize it is possible it was an honest lapse, not an attempt to obfuscate an identity?

How, exactly, did you come to the conclusion that 99.237.217.67 was the IP of one of your regular correpsondents? I sure hope it was more reliable than whatever reasoning you used to come to the conclusion that you could be sure Sherurcij and I were sockpuppets. Geo Swan 22:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

99.237.217.67 is specifically assigned to Rogers Cable Communications Inc., One Mount Pleasant, Toronto, Ontario, M4Y-2Y5.[6] Rogers Cable Communications Inc. may provide services to all parts of Canada but they use different sets of IPs in each of their ISP stations.

Le Behnam wanted to cast his vote but didn't want me to know I guess so I just wanted to let others know that it was Le Behnam probably up to one of his tricks again. Also, so he doesn't make another vote with his ID name.

I know this guy in many other places online, he is the banned Wikipedia editor en:User:Beh-nam. [7] He and one of his mate, en:User:Tajik, (both claiming to be ethnic Tajiks) go surf online and write all the propaganda, untrue and negative things about ethnic Pashtuns of Afghanistan. In fact, that's what all they do everyday. This is his latest undetected sockpuppet on Wiki and see what he said about Pashtuns.[8] If you check that ID name in Wiki checkuser it should confirm it's him. He claims on my talk page here that the people of Afghanistan wrongly call themselves Afghans, even though he admits the Afghan constitution says the correct term for every citizen is Afghan. I never met anyone like him and his other mate before. I keep saying to my self they are probably bored and are just seeking attention. No matter how much I try to convince them that they are wrong but they don't wanna hear it. By the way his mate is from Germany and is using sockpuppets also. I had enough of them on Wiki so I decided to leave from there to come here but now as you can see they are beginning to follow me here.--Executioner 09:45, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I think I had some limited interaction with him or her. I asked why he had changed the use of Afghans to Afghanistani in a couple of articles. He offered me a perfectly reasonable sounding explanation, citing an example of a politician he said called himself Afghanistani, because he wasn't a Pashtun.

AGF. I am not from the region. His example seemed to make sense. So, I was willing to assume he was willing to assume he got that right, until I read a convincing rebuttal. I have read some English-language chauvinists who advanced some weak arguments, against his argument, but no convincing rebuttals.

I did see that he made some heated comments that got him in some trouble a few months. I wasn't really paying attention, but, since my previous contact with this person had been positive, if we are talking about the same person, I gave them some wikilove.

I am fully prepared to believe he could be wrong, and you correct, on this. Care to point me to a place where the arguments you favour were stated clearly?

One Mount Pleasant is about four or five kilometers from where I live. I am pretty sure it the address of Rogers corporate HQ. You are absolutely correct that there are times it would be very useful if ordinary people could trace IPs to the neighbourhood level. I suspect it is not a technical problem however, but a privacy issue. Geo Swan 21:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

That politician you're refering to is en:Latif Pedram and he never called himself Afghanistani, he correctly called himself Afghan. Latif Pedram: "I an standing for the presidential elections based on [my rights according to] the Afghanistan constitution and international standards. I am an Afghan and I have the right, therefore I declared my candidacy," he said. [9]

"Afghanistani" has never been proposed by anyone in Afghanistan and also never been used by anyone in the country. There is a small group of Farsi or Persian-speaking Canadians who prefer to call themselves Afghanistanis because they are anti-Pashtun. Le Behnam and his other mate from Germany are two of those anti-Pashtun. I say this because by now they have revealed themselves pretty well and so we can label them as anti-Pashtun.One of Le Behnam's thoughts on Pashtuns here and one of his mate from Germany (en:User:Tajik's) thoughts here

About the IP number you can just ask Le Behnam if he voted at Omar's deletion page. The ISP stations or sub-stations could be located anywhere in your community, somestimes blocks away and sometimes as far as about 30 minutes drive away.--Executioner 06:47, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Old ethnic maps that I made

I'm thinking of deleting the first maps I made because they are too simple and only show the province. But maybe I should keep it? What do you think? Le Behnam 06:48, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

The maps you created do not represent the true ethnic make over of Afghanistan. There are already official government maps available so I don't care if you delete yours or not.--Executioner 09:00, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Please be civil

Regardless of what you may think of your fellow contributors' speculations, pathologising their behaviour as you did here is completely unacceptable. You also need to read en:Wikipedia:No personal attacks and to follow its advice. —LX (talk, contribs) 16:55, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I tried to ignore his message but ended up replying anyway. I didn't know that calling someone who thinks of child sex "sick minded" was against the rules. I'll try to avoid such words in the future.--Executioner (talk) 05:21, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

So you sincerely believe that sentences like "You should also see a psychiatrist because may be you have some kind of mental disorder" are in line with the spirit of en:Wikipedia:Civility? —LX (talk, contribs) 10:13, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Many people today are experiancing mental disorders around the world and I don't think advising someone of such disorder is offensive. That's why I used the word "may" in my sentence because he may or may not have the disorder. This guy is checking up on me everyday and I think that's not a normal thing for someone to do. I don't know him and he doesn't know me. I guess he is obsessed with me, and I just wanna be left alone here and not be bothered by trouble makers.--Executioner (talk) 15:56, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I will not say this again: you need to stop speculating on the pathology of your fellow contributors. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:39, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Good, and now I like to be not bothered!--Executioner (talk) 16:58, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Ahmad Zahir

Ahmad Zahir never once called himself a Pashtun. He is a part of the Farsi civilization and culture. You should not use one false source to make such a false claim. Out of his hundreds of songs, he only sang 3 Pashto songs due to pressure by the Pashtunist governments.

If Ahmad Zahir was Pashtun as you falsely claim, then why did he never sing songs for Pashtun areas but he sang songs for Shamali (link) and Panjsher (link)? Why would a Pashtun sing songs for Shamali and Panjsher? Le Behnam (talk) 21:57, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

A person can sing in any language and that does not change their ethnic background. The reason why some Pashtuns sing in Dari (Persian) or Urdu rather than in Pashto is because Pashto is not a suitable language for music as compare to Dari or Urdu. Not many Pashto-speaking people listen to music as compare to other groups. We've already discussed Ahmad Zahir's ethnic background and New York Times reported that he is an ethnic Pashtun. "An ethnic Pashtun who sang mostly in Dari, he won fans in all ethnic groups." [10] You have to accept that information from NY Times because they have no reasons to lie about such things. Ask other Afghans and they all will say he is Pashtun. You Tajiks assume that anyone who speaks Dari is Tajik but that's not the case, you are mistaken.--Executioner (talk) 05:37, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I never listened to Ahmad Zahir songs and I don't dig that type of music. I listen to English music as you can see on my user page.--Executioner (talk) 19:02, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Why is that?

Every picture that you upload it shortly is uploaded by the banned and racist user NisarKand on EnWiki? Are you NisarKand from Islamabad, Pakistan? Le Behnam (talk) 23:05, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Every image I upload here is copied to EnWiki, not uploaded by another user. Are you in love with NisarKand because you always talk about him. Don't worry where I am located. I travel around the globe.--Executioner (talk) 05:42, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Pashtuns are Iranian peoples

I've always told you this and told you to stop causing divisions and racism.

Look at Sharbat Gula and compare her to this girl in rural Iran.

They look the same.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Sharbat_Gula.png

You need to stop causing division amongst Iranian peoples. Le Behnam (talk) 06:26, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

I believe that girl in the image is Afghan refugee living in Iran. The source doesn't mention of her being Iranian and I know Iranian girls don't look like that. Iranian chicks are dark and hairy with dark black eye thick black eye brows and they even have light mustaches and side burns.--Executioner (talk) 05:46, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Qizilbash

Thanks for adding that picture to the Qizilbash article on EnWiki. Dost Mohammed Khan was actually half Qizilbash. Did you know that? Le Behnam (talk) 08:06, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Dost Mohammad Khan was Pashtun because his father was Pashtun. There is no clear evidence to his mother being Qizilbash and even if she was that would not change his ethnic background of being a Pashtun. It's that father's side that counts first and you need to learn how that works before you make comments.--Executioner (talk) 05:49, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Category:Manisha Koirala

Image deletion warning

Category:Manisha Koirala has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

--Dobromila (talk) 08:35, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Manisha Koirala is a hot Indian actress, especially when she was younger in her early 1990s movies.--Executioner (talk) 19:47, 29 June 2008 (UTC)