Jump to content

Talk:National Resistance Front of Afghanistan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Khalifahtun (talk | contribs) at 05:17, 24 August 2021 (→Is there any evidence that the Northern Alliance flag is being used?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Requested move 17 August 2021

I have retracted my move proposal after discovering this article is a CFORK with Conflict between the Taliban and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (2021) - the two must be merged, and I prefer that name. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 22:34, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Full support for a merger, but with "Panjshir resistance" or a similar name, as that one seems more commonly used by by the media as of now (or perhaps we wait until a generally accepted name emerges). Applodion (talk) 22:43, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's CRYSTAL to assume an organized resistance will form in Panjshir, or that such a group will call themselves anything like it. It is better to use a title that describes the action (conflict) rather than the group (a set of government officials who have not accepted peace with the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban). User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 22:47, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
After a speedy deletion attempt on the Conflict page, it has been statuated that the Conflict page will focus on the military event which is the fight between Talibans and the resistance, while this page stay to document the organization of said resistance, as there's a page for the French Resistance and a page for the battle of Vercors. As I've said there in the talk part, the only thing that makes those two pages similar is that we currently don't know Talibans whereabout who could be used in the article, restraining for the time its range for resistance actions. So, not really for the merging. Larrayal (talk) 01:51, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose merge per Larrayal. This article purports to be about an organization that may or may not exist, the other article is about a conflict in which said organization is involved against a second organization. We have separate articles for U.S. Army, War in Afghanistan (2001-Present), Afghan National Army, and Taliban. We don't just have one mega-article for all four. Chetsford (talk) 02:39, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support a merge. There is not enough content to justify two separate articles. I support a move to this article simply because this article is better developed, but since that content can be moved I don't have a strong opinion on that point. Zoozaz1 talk 02:45, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose The organization behind the resistance and the conflict itself are two separate things, although I think we may need to wait awhile until both the conflict and the organization become more defined as time progresses. FlalfTalk 03:00, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Merge The name of the target article is in flux, but regardless of what name sticks this article and that one should be merged
Strong Oppose For the same reason as the person above me SteffooM (talk) 04:40, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Strongly - Agree with name of original needing to stay and that there should be all relevant information consolidated in one place for this specific smaller resistance/protest topic, unnecessary splits when we don't know how big an event is can be confusing and become unconstructive down the road. A merge seems resolve these issues.
Dasein (talk) 22:38, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose this is clearly a new development and is being described as such in RS. The name my change but this page has a quite valid referent. Calthinus (talk) 15:26, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My suggestion is to place a "continuing development" disclaimer on the article, and keep it in place for a few more days until the smoke clears. The situation is developing fast, and you're in the middle of the events right now. The Northern Alliance is, eventually, what became the Afghan government after the removal of the Taliban. With their respective roles reversed, once again, to their pre-2001 form, after the return of the Taliban to Kabul, this essentially becomes a continuation of the pre-2001 conflict - phase 3, with phase 2 being the Taliban insurgency in c. 2001-2021. But the operative question that remains unresolved, up to this point, is whether there actually *is* a "phase 3" to the conflict (and a resistance), with the unresolved issue being the ongoing discussions of amnesty and reconciliation. The people involved in this may, themselves, not even be clear on which direction this is going to go in. We'll have to wait and see. If a full-fledged insurgency develops from this situation, then both it and the Taliban insurgency should be tied together with the Northern Alliance insurgency into a comprehensive article on the recent Afghan civil wars; from the 1970's onward. In that case, I move for a merger on a larger scale.

Strong Oppose The Taliban have taken all of Aghanistan, however, so far, have not taken the Panjshir, and they are proclaiming the effort there to resist against the taliban, so indeed it would seem this is a valid effort at resistance so far. We will see what happens, but I think so far its a convenient article for people. Deathlibrarian (talk) 05:26, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Soft Oppose In theory this article can be for the group, not the conflict, but a bit of time will tell whether there is enough content to warrant both articles - if this is short lived and the group is quickly defeated maybe we rethink it. Generally though, I'm thinking a la the FSA vs. specific conflicts/battles in the Syrian war - clearly different topics. -KaJunl (talk) 17:26, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Like with the other merge proposal, I understand why this was proposed after the two articles were first created based on limited information. But the two have grown and changed since then. This article is clearly about the organization, where the other is about the conflict which the organization is involved in.--Grnrchst (talk) 09:09, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support merge Both articles describe a same event. Panjshir conflict sounds like something that has been raging for a long time, so its creation is a bit premature. Sgnpkd (talk) 17:11, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this page is different from the other one. This page is about the resistance organisation itself, so it should be focused on who the resistance are, their mission, leaders, structure, and equipment, like any Army page would be. The other page is about the conflict they are fighting. ThinkingTwice contribs | talk 11:50, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Northern Alliance flag ALLEGEDLY flown in Panjshir

I know this isn't going to stay for long, but I suggest moving the flag of the Northern Alliance in an infobox stating its utilisation has been alleged by some non-primary sources, to avoid confusion. I see it appearing and disappearing, and that Hindustani Times article based on a Twitter post from someone outside the country is clearly responsible. It is probably really flown, but the Afghan flag stays for now the sign of railment of the ANA and the anti-Talibans, apparently. One flag appearance can't be a proof it is a wildly used symbol. So, infobox would probably be the safest option in regard of precision. Larrayal (talk) 23:08, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well I think that one image of it being flown is solid, but I think whether that it is actually being used as a symbol of the organized resistance is unclear. I agree that we should leave it blank for now. FlalfTalk 02:58, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
On another note the flag isn't even the former northern alliance flag, but is instead an inverted version. See [1]. FlalfTalk 03:30, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That file should probably be deleted. It's not from 2021, see this talk section  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 19:25, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I added both the flags of Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and Northern Alliance inverted version flag. I also added the fact that it has been allegedly flown. I think it’s a good compromise. Feel free to disagree. GigaNerd233 (talk) 03:45, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. I've seen several other unreliable press sources where it was flown, as well as the IRA flag. May be all fakes, but the last thing we need to confirm it to be used as a symbol at this point is its presence along IRA officials or warlords or photography with it used by the remnants of the ANA more wildly into reliable press. Larrayal (talk) 03:55, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, so I have found a video evidence of the resistance parade, with the green-white-red flag in the Panjshir valley. Here is the link, downloaded from someone's instagram story, uploaded it onto Vimeo, here's the link vimeo.com/588938486 (not an evidence from a credible source, but an evidence regardless) BasilLeaf (talk) 16:42, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Second" Resistance

Requested move 18 August 2021

Panjshir resistance → Second Resistance – I've seen for the last two days several mentions as early as 2021 January of the use of the term "moqawamat-e do" (litteraly, Second Resistance or Resistance II). It seems used by various sources throughout the year, even if uses of this term seems to calm down in recent times. I feel like this is very much PR from Massoud (the Resistance being the fight of his father) and anti-Talibans before the 2021 invasion. And now, this "Resistance II" is probably undifferentiable from the so-called "Panjshir resistance". (So-called, because outside Panjshir and even outside Afghanistan it seems that some moves will be attempted. If this article is to be kept (which I advocate), it should probably be named something like Resistance II or Second Resistance (Afghanistan) more than Panjshir Resistance. It's something visibly planned for long, and the name is visibly used by the population as well as officials. More reliable sources could be useful about that. The only Panjshir-related name usable is probably "Panjshir pocket", anyway.

I know "renaming" subjects can be hard, seeing the debate about "fall/Fall of Kabul" and especially the renaming battle over its sister article, so please be civil on exposing arguments. Larrayal (talk) 04:32, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - Even as a temporary name for now that would be changed to a more apt one later when dust settles it fits better and would be less of an issue for events outside the region that aren't happening in the valley, I do wonder if conflict is more neutral for everyone although some say in the debates over the word that it seems to imply a second war as opposed to a protest or however people see it for now? I always thought that conflict carried the an implication more toward fighting and instability/discontent in some lesser controlled areas.
Dasein (talk) 22:26, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Requested_move support it is important


  • Comment As Panjshir resistance as a term started to appear in news outlets after this article apparition, I suggest moving it to Second resistance (which is backed) as early as possible, because misinformation is quickly circulating. If there isn't any more comments about this, will do it in 3 hours, if nobody does it earlier. A locutor of pashto would be nice too to chose between "Second" and "II". Larrayal (talk) 14:21, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I support an expedited move. Chetsford (talk) 16:13, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is the best name we have so far. As Massoud's the reported head of the movement along with Saleh, this is more than simple evidence. We should move it immediatly, with synonymity with second resistance and resistance II. Panjshir resistance is totally wrong and can't stay any longer. Larrayal (talk) 17:30, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the proposed name; based on the WaPo source "National Resistance Front" will likely be the best name but I want to wait before supporting that. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 17:35, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose my earlier proposed name in favour of "National Resistance Front". Still in favor of a speedy change, as the current name is already influencing outside medias (notably indian). Larrayal (talk) 17:40, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I support a move to any of the proposed names. Anything other than "Panjshir resistance". Chetsford (talk) 17:44, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Could we go with something descriptive, like "Resistance to the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan (2021—)"? IMO the problem is a lack of RS— "National Resistance Front of Afghanistan" is probably the best choice, but I'd still like to see more than a single opinion piece from a senior leader that used it only in passing. There simply isn't enough information published yet to substantiate a single name, so anything we choose would necessarily be unverifiable and possibly incorrect. Intralexical (talk) 17:54, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support move; any of the proposed names works as long as it’s well-used. As the person who created the article, I only intended “Panjshir resistance” as a descriptive title, as no actual name for the group was clear at the time. Chessrat (talk, contributions) 18:54, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Do all person involved here agrees that the name used for this article is wrong, and hence should be moved as fast as possible to a neutral form Resistance to the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan (2021) while we wait for RS to confirm or infirm "Second resistance", "Resistance II", or "National Resistance Front" ? (I know this is long, but we should avoid misinformation for these kind of event at all cost.) Larrayal (talk) 22:21, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that the current name is not optimal, but there is simply no common name for the group as yet. The best option is to wait and see what develops. The above name implies the resistance is throughout all of Afghanistan, which it is not. There is no deadline. Zoozaz1 talk 22:24, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't see the above name as implying any geographical extent for the resistance, only that there is resistance. In my mind, it goes without saying that the "resistance" can't possibly be throughout all of Afghanistan— otherwise, there wouldn't be much of a "Taliban takeover". I think the lack of a common name is a good reason to switch to a more clearly descriptive name like that. The current title is easier to mistake for a common name. I'm not sure how I feel about "No deadline" when it comes to an ongoing conflict where media outlets are allegedly starting to pick up and proliferate the incorrect name. Intralexical (talk) 23:16, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The resistance is localized to a specific area, and I think it is best for a descriptive title to reflect that. The above title, which may or may not imply the resistance existing in all of Afghanistan, does not state where the resistance is specifically (in and around Panjshir). The current name is suboptimal in that it is just a name made up by Wikipedia users to describe the situation, but the suggested name is the same in that sense. Zoozaz1 talk 23:24, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I think it's more important to state what an organization is resisting than where they're based. They could move, be driven out, or seize back territory, but they'll still be resisting the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan. The current title pins them to a geographic location, but says little about what they actually are. Will we rename the page with every territorial change? The suggested title is also better than the current one in that it's clearer that it's not a name. E.G. "Reliability of Wikipedia" and "Criticism of Wikipedia" are titles that were "made up by Wikipedia users to describe the situation", but it's not a problem because they won't be mistaken for an official name of anything. Intralexical (talk) 00:14, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No such thing as a "correct" name its all about what people use, and Panjshir resistance, a resistance based in Panjshir isn't terribly off the mark. Personally would support something shorter than what was proposed by Larrayal, like Anti-Taliban Resistance (2021), but if you want it to be longer I think Anti-Taliban Resistance in Afghanistan (2021) is good as well. FlalfTalk 23:21, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Anti-Taliban Resistance" sounds too much like an official name, IMO. The benefit of "Resistance to the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan (2021)" is that it makes it clear that the article title is just a description chosen by Wikipedia. Intralexical (talk) 00:19, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The proposed name is quite silly. This isn't Star Wars or some other sci-fi opera - despite people's best misguided intentions. --Truth be toad (talk) 00:07, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Most of the proposed names have been based on RS, rather than any "sci-fi opera". If they're too silly, then that should be taken up with the Washington Post and with the resistance group themselves, not judged here. Intralexical (talk) 00:16, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    We don't have to ape everything from tabloid journalism. Especially, such a nascent unfolding event. Coming to a once-renowned newspaper near you: World War 3: Attack of The Drones. --Truth be toad (talk) 00:28, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    ??? The Washington Post is probably about as far from tabloid journalism as you can get. One of the sources, for the name "National Resistance Front of Afghanistan", was written by the leader of the group themselves. Intralexical (talk) 00:39, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Usage of Second Resistance, Resistance II, and even more recently Resistance 2.0 is documented in many medias, the two first being used in RS since at least january. The first Resistance apparently being for Tajik and other northern ethnies the struggle of Massoud father against the USSR, the Talibans, or both. This is also wildly used in Afghan medias. The National Resistance Front is much more recent and is AFAIK only mentionned by Massoud son, maybe it's PR but it's still in use. Also, if you are not aware of it, Resistance is an english term denoting a struggle against an authority or a grater power before being a Star Wars organization. Just imagine in 1940 people asking to call the french resistance an other name because in 40 years a man named Georges Lucas would realize something named Star Wars. If you have evidence of another name being used and that the Washington Post and the other media referenced talking about any of the proposed names, feel free to propose it here. Also, sometimes, things from Star Wars crosses the mirror, and stating it's impossible is WP:CRYSTAL anyway. If you have any problem with the given name by the Afghan people, feel free to contact Massoud, Saleh or the nearest Afghan embassy to signal your disagreement or the famous tabloid The Washington Post that they should invent another name, I'm sure they'll be interested by your advice. Larrayal (talk) 00:51, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    To suggest these alternate names go back as far as January is simply absurd. How can they be then termed resistance when these protaganists were still the recognised and practical rulers of Afghanistan in January? The resistance was only born about 1 week ago when Kabul was captured and the government fled. I simply call for patience while this febrile atmosphere settles a little and some clear, widely repeated, sticky name surfaces.--Truth be toad (talk) 01:13, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The collapse was anticipated and prepared for far in advance. Contingency planning is not "simply absurd", and even if it is, it's not Wikipedia's role to judge it as such if RS did indeed report it. Calling then name "silly" and "Star Wars" isn't the same as "call[ing] for patience", nor is calling the WaPo "tabloid journalism". I think I mostly agree with your stated sentiment, but the given arguments all work against it. Intralexical (talk) 16:22, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- From WP:RSUE,

If you quote a non-English reliable source (whether in the main text or in a footnote), a translation into English should always accompany the quote. Translations published by reliable sources are preferred over translations by Wikipedians, but translations by Wikipedians are preferred over machine translations. When using a machine translation of source material, editors should be reasonably certain the translation is accurate and the source is appropriate. Editors should not rely upon machine translations of non-English sources in contentious articles or biographies of living people. If needed, ask an editor who can translate it for you.

Can you share the sources? Is there not a reliable source which translates to English?Manabimasu (talk) 00:43, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the original expression comes from this article, quoted by the Washington Post who chosed to get along with Resistance II, while the original paper gives the two translations. The thing is to know which is the more fit to stay as the consensual pre-18 August name. (https://www.afghanistan-analysts.org/en/reports/war-and-peace/preparing-for-a-post-departure-afghanistan-changing-political-dynamics-in-the-wake-of-the-us-troop-withdrawal-announcement/) (Both are used often in RS) Larrayal (talk) 00:59, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There is a source using Second Resistance here. Zoozaz1 talk 01:56, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Completely unreliable, sadly. The article starts by citing Sputnik, which is not considered a reliable source for Afghanistan, it continues by a translation of Ahmed Massoud's discourse in Bernard-Henri Lévy's paper (about which I don't know the reliability, but BHL is widely known in France for being an hazardous source) which is probably the most real part of this article, and ends up with a litteral copy of the Wikipedia page for Ahmad Massoud son which used probably the same source for this name than the one above. It's a total travestee, sadly nobody in media seems to know the real antics of Massoud. Larrayal (talk) 02:26, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose way too vague. The title doesn't even indicate that this is an Afghan group. However, it seems that the group is not calling itself the "Panjshir resistance" but rather the (Afghan) National Resistance Front, at least in Massoud's peace in WaPo [4]. That may be a better target, though Panjshir resistance is certainly suitable for the time being, unless it starts to spread out of Panjshir rapidly.--Calthinus (talk) 17:47, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose name is not specific. What’s the matter with the current name? BigRed606 (talk) 01:27, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Although I also oppose, note @DagosNavy: that this appears to have changed as of today -- forces under Dadgar have taken three districts in Baghlan and are fighting for a fourth. --Calthinus (talk) 16:49, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Second Resistance is a fancy type of name. I would rather suggest merging this page to National Resistance Front of Afghanistan, because that is much better you know like Emirate of Afghanistan, Republic of Afghanistan and similarly Resistance Front of Afghanistan. There are many sites labelling this resistance as the National Resistance Front of Afghanistan. 15:04, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
Agree This is the name used by Ahmad Massoud which makes it the official name. Charles Essie (talk) 16:43, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Agree This, by all accounts, appears to be the official name and would fit in well with the naming convention for other organizations. --Grnrchst (talk) 21:32, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources needed

The article is a bit on wobbly legs, in my opinion, at the least right now. While the "activate the northern alliance" idea is understandable, we have more than +20 years passed. So people get older and I just can't see +60 years old on the front lines ... so the article should clarify things better in this regard, from a more objective point of view. 2A02:8388:1604:F600:6D3E:54F:D1:F386 (talk) 04:44, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why was the Afghan flag removed?

Saleh claims to be the president of Afghanistan and there’s no evidence they’ve ceased using the Afghan flag. Chessrat (talk, contributions) 14:50, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've put them back up. The first article is not 100% reliable even if it had been widely spread, the Washington Post don't precise any flag use. Especially this line "The flag of the National Resistance Front will fly over every position that they attempt to take, as the National United Front flag flew 20 years ago. " Massoud clearly draws a line between the two flags, if they are the same is unclear (or the same but inverted). We should use caution for that matter, even if I personnaly believe that the Northern Alliance flag or an alternative version will soon take precedence over the IRA flag if fighting ensues. Larrayal (talk) 15:17, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Chessrat and Larrayal: It should be taken out. This group does not claim to be a continuation of IRA, has no evidence of using the IRA flag, where as it was seen using the Northern Alliance flag. Viewsridge (talk) 15:25, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Can you prove that Saleh doesn't pretend to be the president of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, or that Afghans are not litteraly dying in the streets when the Talibans remove their flags ? We shall keep the two, at least for avoiding confusion as the two flags may be used interchangeably by the Resistance in the future and as we lack RS on the Northern Alliance one. I've seen the videos of the convoy with the flags, but for now nothing is confirmed so far. Removing the IRA's is WP:CRYSTAl. Larrayal (talk) 15:31, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No and I don't have to prove it. You have to prove/cite something to include it. Otherwise it is original research. Viewsridge (talk) 15:35, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Saleh is de facto "caretaker" president of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. The Islamic Republic of Afghanistan uses the flag of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. Hence, the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan's flag shall be kept as the leader of the resistance is the head of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan which hasn't changed its flag since the 18 August, while also using the flag of the Northern Alliance as a symbol. That would be like saying "We can't keep the US flag as the US flag, because Biden has not said today that it is still the flag of the US". Larrayal (talk) 15:40, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Saleh is de facto "caretaker" president of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan" this is a blatant false statement not backed by any references. Viewsridge (talk) 15:47, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

​ From the sources the Northern Alliance flag is flown though Saleh has allied himself with the Panjshir group. Leaning towards only Northern alliance flag unless a source shows both but both is fine as Saleh is affiliated with IRA.here and hereManabimasu (talk) 15:57, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. Viewsridge (talk) 16:00, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
So, apparently, per https://www.republicworld.com/world-news/rest-of-the-world-news/afghan-resistance-against-taliban-led-by-ahmed-masood-and-amrullah-saleh-unveils-its-flag.html the modified flag of the Northern Alliance is in use. As I said earlier I've no experience in Indian media and this subject isn't about k-pop, but I feel extra cautious about that. This article is also accusing Pakistan and that's also kinda backed, but only kinda. It is also calling Ahmad Massoud "Shah", as his father, which isn't really a proof of reliability to me. The assigned flag isn't the same than the one in the article, it's a commonly used variant. So, caution is probably still needed, but in the meantime, I feel like the Panjshir group is sufficiently different ethnically and politically from the protesters who use the IRA flag at this point to be specified only by the Northern Alliance one. I am now officially insane. Let's just remove all flags until a version of the new flag is made here. Larrayal (talk) 04:50, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
See the section on WP:RSP about Republic World. We do have other sources saying they used the Northern Alliance flag at least once, so imo as long as we say "allegedly" it should be fine to have that. At this time we don't have sources saying they use the IRA flag, but seeing as some users want it I'll add that to the article (not infobox) with a caption that contextualizes the situation. Zoozaz1 talk 04:59, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the republic world citation and the flag that they alleged was used. Found no other evidence supporting the use of the Northern Alliance flag with emblem being used outside of Republic World, which is a source known to be unreliable. For now we should have both the Afghan and modified Northern Alliance flag. FlalfTalk 16:46, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Zoozaz1: Why did you remove Islamic republic flag? Saleh has expressed support for its use as well. It's not uncommon that a group takes multiple symbols. FlalfTalk 16:51, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Flalf, I didn't remove it, I added it back in. Calthinus removed it after my edit adding it back in had other unintended effects. Zoozaz1 talk 16:55, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Zoozaz1 It was probably an edit conflict where both of us tried to add it back at once and you accidentally reverted. Not your fault, all good. :) FlalfTalk 16:57, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Flalf, Oh, I think you were referring to the flag inside the infobox. I may have accidentally removed that, I was referring to adding the flag outside of the infobox. Zoozaz1 talk 16:59, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, OK. Good to know. FlalfTalk 17:00, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious

Does anyone know what Banu district is? It is not in Category:Districts of Baghlan Province, nor is anything phonetically similar. This website says it was divided from Andarab district, but the Baghlan province page lists the districts divided from Andarab and none of them seem similar phonetically to Banu. I've added a tag to it. Zoozaz1 talk 17:04, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

According to the list I've found here Bano Andarab may be an alternate name for Andarab? Seems phonetically similiar enough. FlalfTalk 17:19, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That makes sense, BasilLeaf said the same on Talk:Panjshir conflict. Zoozaz1 talk 17:34, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 August 2021

The analysis section:

The valley is also known for its emeralds, which were used in the past to finance the resistance movements against those in power.

Before the Taliban seized power, the Panjshir province had repeatedly demanded more autonomy from the central government.

Long history of resistance Panjshir Valley was among the safest regions in the country during the time of the NATO-backed government from 2001 to 2021.[1]


The reactions or analysis section:

Russia also emphasized on Thursday that a resistance movement was forming in the Panjshir Valley, led by Saleh and Massoud. "The Taliban doesn't control the whole territory of Afghanistan," Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said.

It is, however, not clear how strong this new anti-Taliban resistance movement is and how the new rulers in Kabul will react to it.

"If we can take the Taliban at their word, then Panjshir should be safe because the war in Afghanistan is over. The Taliban have pledged to stop using force, which suggests that they will leave areas not controlled by the Taliban alone. But we will have to wait and see," Michael Kugelman, a South Asia expert at the Washington-based Wilson Center, told DW.

He added: "But if an organized military resistance forms in the region, I don't think it's out of the question that the Taliban will go against it. And if they do, they will win quickly and easily."[2] Marsuli111 (talk) 07:37, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://amp.dw.com/en/why-afghanistans-panjshir-remains-out-of-talibans-reach/a-58921687
  2. ^ https://amp.dw.com/en/why-afghanistans-panjshir-remains-out-of-talibans-reach/a-58921687
 Not done: Copyright violation. Zoozaz1 talk 14:45, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Many (probably false) reports of pledge to Emirate

There's a lot of chatter (most likely disinformation) at Twitter now, some of which is being echoed in the press, that Massoud has pledged allegience to the Emirate. Mostly unconfirmed, though.

PanjshinProvin1 ("Panjshin Province") at Twitter a short while ago: "Ahmad Massoud, commander of the People's Resistance Forces in Panjshir, is negotiating with the Taliban over a comprehensive government, but no agreement or allegiance has been reached."

Regards, Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 14:25, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If we are taking Twitter as a proof, Panjshir based figures as well as Taliban spokesperson have called that bs. Certainly a third party lie to create more disruption, most likely al-Qaeda, apparently. I saw this on Ahmad Massoud's page as well, but as it isn't protected, misinformation could spread more rapidly. There's also claims that Ghani's brother has passed to the Emirate, I don't know about those as well. Larrayal (talk) 15:11, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Russian ambassador comments

It currently states "Russian ambassador Dmitry Zhirnov labeled the resistance as "doomed" and that the resistance would fail. Zhirnov further stated that Saleh's proclamation of caretaker president is unconstitutional, and added that they have "no military prospects"."

However, according to the source, https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/resistance-taliban-is-doomed-says-russian-envoy-afghanistan-2021-08-20/, Zhirnov says "They have no military prospects. There are not many people there. As far as we know they have 7,000 armed people. And they already have problems with fuel. They tried to fly a helicopter but they have no petrol and no supplies"

I can't find a single source where he labelled/said in his words that the resistance is "doomed", it looks to be from the headline

I propose that we change this to: "The Russian ambassador to Afghanistan, Dimitry Zhirnov, dismissed the prospects of the resistance saying they have 'no military prospects', and considered Saleh's proclamation as caretaker president unconstitutional."

I would also add the following sentence, but it's not directly related to the resistance movement.

"Further, in a criticism of the previous government, stated that the Taliban were the de-facto authorities and hoped that they would improve the socio-economic situation."Angele201002 (talk) 16:51, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tbh I don't see the point of putting the advice of this extremely moderately known guy whose entire job consist on putting a good face with anyone is in charge of Kabul and who is already known for dramatically bad point such as praising the Talibans for making Kabul's streets safer and that people feel safer and hopeful under the new government, for which we have plenthy of sources who says absolutely overwise comprising the fact that people prefer falling to their death from a C-17 rather than staying in town, and who is, in no way, a military expert, nor a renown political figure, nor a Central Asia specialist, nor deciding of Russia's policy with Afghanistan or the Taliban ; his stance seems to be the absolute contrary to any of the stances of anyone involved comprising other russian citizen. He's clearly in PR damage control to keep Russia's face with the Taliban, whatever they're deciding in the Kremlin, Russian intelligence has not revealed itself to be extremely trustworthy in the later days especially relating to Panjshir (see the whole Charikar situation). Obviously he will praise Taliban for the time being, and if the Second Resistance manages to take Kabul, he will praise them as well. Just remove him from the "Reaction" part, we probably have other people far better placed to say that the rebellion is doomed who are not directly involved with the situation on ground, US generals, head of states, ex-ambassadors, etc, but a current ambassador is not the type of reaction we need. Roggio, Dorronsoro, Sengupta brings something to the table in analysis, Roychowdhury is an exemple of political reaction inside another nation, Zhirnov is nothing of that. I've nothing against Panjshir criticism, but criticism like that should be taken with great caution. Larrayal (talk) 02:49, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Should it be removed? Ominae (talk) 03:20, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Remove IRA flag

The flag of Islamic Republic of Afghanistan should be removed now, only the green, white and black flag should stay. There are many sources using that as the flag. If you search Panjshir resistance flag, the green, white and black flag comes. Also I have seen many videos on Twitter of Panjshir soliders with that flag such as 1, 2 and 3. I know these videos are from Twitter but still they are proof and evidence that National Resistance Front use this flag. 11:27, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

-- Unsigned

  • Comment - Wouldn't that count as unreliable original research though? Don't know how people feel about verifiability of it but surely it wouldn't fit under WP Core Content Policies to make that change based off of that?

I've seen people use the IRA flag too and been assaulted for it before the flag getting confiscated in the protests on Reddit. I can't be seen as a source though if I put a video of it right? Dasein (talk) 18:27, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Daseiin Reddit is user generated content (i.e. self-published) and thus not reliable for the purposes of Wikipedia. Verified AMAs can be used as a Primary source, but otherwise it should not be used. BSMRD (talk) 18:30, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Right, so it's safe to say that Twitter posts would have the same effect as reasons for removing the IRA flag from the article?
Although this debate/request has happened before and ended up keeping it, seems to be a possible consensus established to oppose removing it and should probably wait till proper sources show information that establish the situation has changed enough for everyone to state otherwise on here. Dasein (talk) 18:39, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
WP:SELFPUB/WP:SOCIALMEDIA are the official guidelines on the sources you are talking about. Broadly speaking, sources like these are unreliable, though exceptions do exist. The flag question really isn't going to be resolved until the situation stabilizes a bit and we can get (verifiable) eyes on the ground. BSMRD (talk) 18:44, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 August 2021

The "Indian reaction" ought to be obviated; it is not an official state position and is only the personal analysis of a past Chief of Army Staff. Insinuating anything other than the aforementioned, is rather Machiavellian, and frankly, politically motivated disingenuity. Lost Atheist (talk) 10:08, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:34, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any evidence that the Northern Alliance flag is being used?

Two sources in the infobox are being used, both of which are very problematic (and both of them cite social media).

The first source, a Hindustan Times article, is used to source the claim that the green-white-black tricolor without a seal is being used:

The article published August 17th, 2021 titled "'Northern Alliance' flag hoisted in Panjshir in first resistance against Taliban" cites a photograph which it says is from Twitter ("An image of the flag shared by on Twitter. (@HajiNoorUllah7)(Twitter)"), and a simple reverse image search shows that this photograph is not new. For example, here's that same photo (in video form) from a 4 month old Instagram post.

And here's a two year old Facebook post with that exact photo.

and here's the other source, used to verify the claim that the Islamic State of Afghanistan flag with a seal is being used: [5] (yes, the source being cited was just a Twitter link). To its credit, I'm not finding anything when reverse image searching this photo, so maybe the Twitter post is actually more credible than the Hindustan Times article. However, at the very least, we should change the tricolor in the infobox to the Islamic State of Afghanistan banner if we are to continue citing the Twitter link.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 19:23, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I should probably add that my preference is to use exclusively the 2013-2021 Islamic Republic of Afghanistan flag or no flag at all unless we have any credible sources claiming that any variation of the green-white-black flag is being used. We need to stop jumping the gun and updating the symbols based on social media posts, this is very similar to what happened with the alleged IEA flag.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 19:46, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen both with the Republic most common but as previously said, video posted somewhere wouldn't really count as reliable and certainly not enough to make a change.
Wondering why the Northern one was taken out completely/reverted though. Would both not be relevant here? Could be useful to establish a consensus before making a change to the position of either flag surely? Dasein (talk) 22:13, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to add that the teal-blueish green flag appears to be prevalent in these images/videos, including a vertical variant: [6] [7] [8] Can anyone confirm their credibility? They appear to be recent, and one has an AFP credit but a reverse search brings up nothing.180app (talk) 23:11, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We really shouldn't be citing random Twitter posts with only a few likes. The problem is: there are no sources other than Twitter posts to verify the existence of this alleged flag. The closest thing to a secondary, non-UGC post was a Hindustan Times article, but as I already mentioned above, it too sourced its content from Twitter and it turned out to be complete misinformation. Either we have a reliable source to verify the existence of this flag, or it shouldn't be in the article.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 23:22, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
AFP gives a photo of children carrying the flag [9] Wowzers122 (talk) 23:28, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is the most reliable source so far, though the version seen in this photograph is a vertical tricolor (as opposed to a horizontal one like the file that was used in the article). I'd still be concerned that it'd be original research for us to go ahead and create a file recreating this vertical triband of black white and turquoise and add it to the infobox, though. As of right now, that AFP news tweet is the only thing we have that isn't from a random nobody on social media, so it's still way too early to jump to conclusions about what banners the Panjshir resistance is using in 2021. Best to just wait for more information before messing with the infobox.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 23:43, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have founded perhaps the most reliable source for the Panjshir flag and Ahmad Massoud is standing infront of the flag. 1

Getting consensus for 17th as start date?

Not sure about where things stand atm, Why was the date moved away from 17th? It also seems to have moved multiple times other than that aswell.

Considering a lot of things happened from the 17th seemingly in response to the declaration of a victory (after Fall of Kabul on 16th) by the Emirates, I boldly propose we keep to the previous edit for 17th as start date for conflict before changes were reverted. Dasein (talk) 23:19, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - Seems that sources and other information referencing 17th were removed aswell. Not having a clear and fixed start date after Fall of Kabul & The War happening doesn't help other pages stay consistent with this one and reverting back-and-forth seems deconstructive to attempts of getting consistency. Dasein (talk) 23:25, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support - I !vote support because of the points made in the original post and the comments, also feel like it would avoid potential disruption in the larger topic, help consistency and give a date that is relatively fixed without revert (i.e. only editing with evidence across the board saying otherwise that would result in changing dates in other parts of the larger topic for Afghanistan Conflicts)
    Dasein (talk) 23:39, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:National_Resistance_Front_of_Afghanistan&oldid=1040370824"