Talk:Provinces of Afghanistan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Panjshir 2 Large map 3 naming conventions 4 Dubious borders 5 Name 6 Missing provinces? 7 Provinces Template 8 Daikondi & Orūzgān

[edit] Panjshir

There is now a new province, Panjshir [1]. Roozbeh 23:39, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

• I've added it to the page and created an article. Each province article needs to be updated to say 34 rather than 33 provinces. Wanna do it? :)

P.S. I indented the new provinces because the numbers need to reflect the map. Kingturtle 02:32, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I suggest you change the articles to omit the number of provinces, as this may continue. I'm just glad I hadn't been able to update the maps yet! :) Morwen 07:20, Apr 15, 2004 (UTC)~

OK, i changed them all from 33 to 34. Kingturtle 08:22, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Large map

The map is so large it ruins the display of the page on Mozilla on Win2K with a 800x600 resolution and default (100%) zoom level. I guess we either need to have a smaller map or do something with the layout. Roozbeh 17:15, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Thanks to Kingturtle, it's done now. Roozbeh 17:42, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)

[edit] naming conventions

Because of a recent question raised regarding this issue, I thought I would use this talk page to make this naming convention clear.

The provinces of Afghanistan are commonly spelled with a lower case p rather than an upper case P. (see for example: [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12]). So in Wikipedia, we are using this protocol. Kingturtle 17:15, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hi Kingturtle, Do the sources you cite have an consistent approach to subnational entities in general? Well, bad question. Please have a look at: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Subnational_entities#Current_use I am in strong favor of having it the same for all subnational entities. Or at least as even as possible. Would like to see Afghanistan provinces joining this. Tobias Conradi 05:27, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

http://www.google.com/search?q=kandahar%20province%20-wikipedia Tobias Conradi (Talk) 02:12, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Examples for "X Province": aims.org.af [13] ,worldbank [14] ,militaryreporters.org [15] ,un.org.pk [16] ,kabul.usembassy.gov [17]

Tobias, slow down and respond please. That USembassy.gov is the link I mention below about the word appearing only in the headline - EVERY major word in that headline is capitalized. Find a better example than that. Like [18]. --Golbez 02:40, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

(Tobias called the moves of Golbez unilateral, discussion moved from User_talk:Tobias Conradi)

How are my moves any more unilateral than yours? At least I have someone familiar with Afghanistan supporting me on it. --Golbez 01:51, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

While there was talking about Wikipedia:Naming conventions (subnational entities) User Special:Contributions/Golbez moved provinces of Afghanistan from the format "X Province" to "X province". Tobias Conradi (Talk) 02:01, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

You had voluntarily withdrawn yourself from discussion. Furthermore, Wikipedia:Ignore all rules. Standards exist as guideline - not law. You did not answer my question, either. I will not revert you at this moment, but if this continues, one of us will have to start a RfC on the other. Your move. --Golbez 02:08, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

Tobias, that google search did not help you one bit. In order of the first ten: #1 has it caps; #2 and #3 only have it caps in the headline, in the article itself it's lowercase; #4 has it lowercase; #5 has it caps; #6 has it lowercase; #7 is a Wikipedia mirror; #8 has it lowercase; #9 is a Wikipedia mirror; and #10 only has it caps in the headline, no usage in the body so a true evaluation can't be made. Let's go to the next ten! #11 is caps; #12 is lowercase; #13 is caps in headline, lowercase in body; #14 is caps; #15 is caps but is a map header so I would discount it, since one expects those to be uppercase; #16 is caps; #17 is lowercase; #18 is lowercase; #19 is lowercase; #20 is lowercase.

So, of the top 20 google results to the query YOU gave, two were Wikipedia mirrors; six used caps exclusively; three use caps in header and lowercase in body; eight use lowercase; and one is inconclusive (#10). I would say the lowercase-in-body ones count as lowercase, but even if you don't count those, lowercase wins. Shall I move to the next ten? Caps, Lower, Lower, Lower, Caps, Lower (note the last two were on the same UN site; it seems to alternate at will), Lower, Caps, Caps, and unusable (appears only in total capitalization "PROVINCE", or as a single word; it's a map). That ups the tally by 4 for caps and 5 for lower. Next ten! Lower, Lower, CapsHead/LowerBody, Wiki mirror, Lower, Caps, Caps, Lower, Lower, Caps. Three more for caps, one wiki mirror, five lower case, and 1 that errs towards lower case.

I could go on. The point is, there is no specific standard, but using lower case is most likely the least offensive method at present. And remember - You moved them to the capitalized names in the first place. Based on these google results, you shouldn't have done that. --Golbez 02:30, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

I'm awaiting a response, Tobias. I thank you, by the way, for confining your reverts to Afghanistan and not touching that I'm doing on Brazil. --Golbez 03:44, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

I'm going to say this and then get back to work. When this all started, Tobias, you asked: "Do the sources you cite have an consistent approach to subnational entities in general?" The correct answer, I hope, is no. No one cares about other provinces unless directly relevant.

last sentence is WRONG. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 17:43, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

So you care? OK. Sorry. But, if you care, then that means you care about other articles that aren't directly relevant to this one, so I don't see how that helps. --Golbez 17:47, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

What about moving these provinces to "X". Simply that. Paktia. Bamiyan. Kandahar (province. Etc. If you have an objection, please state it, without using google. (Google gives 15300 results for "paktia province" -wikipedia; and 15200 results for paktia afghanistan -wikipedia -province. In other words, a complete dead heat) I would prefer "X province" but I just want to see what your comment on this is. --Golbez 15:44, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

try to determine how many disambigs will be needed in the future. Otherwise I don't know why not having them at X. But I think they are called Velayat-Kandahar. Some names might be derived from tribes, cities, ancient regions etc. Maybe we try to add name etymologies for every province before moving. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 17:43, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

That's OK, I don't want to do "X" anymore, I want "X province". Also, we don't have to care about future disambigs, we can move articles as needed. --Golbez 17:47, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Dubious borders

According to this map the Eastern part of the territory of Balkh Province belongs to Samangan Province. Does anyone know who is right?--Cruccone (talk) 13:09, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

There's also an error in giving part of Parvan to Kapisa. I'm going to try to redo the map, adding the two new provinces. Check back in a week or so. --Golbez 06:57, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

Or a month. :) --Golbez 02:44, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Name

Based on some chat (like that above), I've moved all the articles, except Badakhshan (since that also describes a region), to "X province". Most were at "X Province". If anyone thinks they should be named WITHOUT the "province" name, go for it, just helpfully explain why here please. Thanks! --Golbez 13:08, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Missing provinces?

I notice Paktia province is a broken link, but google cache shows a page used to exist for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paktia_Province

Why was it deleted? Does it no longer exist? If so why is it still listed as one of the "34" provinces of Afghanistan?

I'm guessing the person who removed it gave a reason somewhere, but I do not know how to find it.

--201.218.111.148 22:49, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Must have been a Wiki hiccup, because it's there. I've been hearing occasional reports of articles "disappearing", only to be there by the time someone else looks. It's a technical issue, not a human one. :) --Golbez 23:38, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Can't see it neither, but when editing content is there. I use classic skin. Had the same issue yesterday with another page. For me this is the first time. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 02:00, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Provinces Template

I added the template at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Infobox_Afghanistan_Province

Usage:

{{Infobox Afghanistan Province 
|province_name = Province_Name
|map = Afghanistan-Province_Name.png
|capital = [[Province_Capital_Name]]
|latd = ~
|longd = ~
|pop_year = ~
|population = ~
|area = ~
|density = 
|languages= [[Pashto language|Pashto]]<br/> [[Dari (Afghanistan)|Dari]]<br/> [[Hazaragi language|Hazaragi]]<br/>
}}

Example:

{{Infobox Afghanistan Province 
|province_name = Kabul
|map = Afghanistan-Kabul.png
|capital = [[Kabul]]
|latd = 34.517
|longd = 69.183
|pop_year = 2002
|population = 3,314,000  
|area = 4,462  
|density = 
|languages= [[Pashto language|Pashto]]<br/> [[Dari (Afghanistan)|Dari]]<br/> [[Hazaragi language|Hazaragi]]<br/>
}}

Populaion and Area (2002) can be found at: http://www.statoids.com/uaf.html Coordinates for the Capital City: http://www.tageo.com/index-e-af.htm

User: Asfandyar

[edit] Daikondi & Orūzgān

Are the sizes of these provinces correctly shown?

So far as I can tell, why? --Golbez 01:18, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

This site [19] shows the area of Daikondi is abot 8000Km Square. The area for Bamyan is 14,175 km². Now on the map they look the same size.
Also Orūzgān seems smaller than the area mentioned in the site.
-- Asfandyar 02:07, 21 November 2006 PST (UTC-8)

If you can find a better map, I'll check it out, but the source map I used indicated these borders, so either the map was wrong, or Statoids is. --Golbez 10:57, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

A source favoring my map: [20] (note it's from an Afghan government site). --Golbez 11:03, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

The page Oruzgan_Province says that Gizab District has been given back to Oruzgan. It was added Daykundi in 2004 but given back to Oruzgan in 2006. This might need to verified and all relevant should be modified, if needed.
-- Asfandyar