Jump to content

Talk:Ahmad Shah Massoud

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) at 01:23, 28 May 2020 (Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Ahmad Shah Massoud/Archive 3) (bot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Another Semi-protected Edit Request 28/5/2020

If you need a source for "Massoud was assassinated at the instigation of al-Qaeda and Taliban in a suicide bombing on September 9, 2001" then Johnathon L. Lee's 2019 book "A History from 1260 to the Present" says so page 647. Paragraph from the book with relevant information is

"By the autumn of 2001 bin Laden felt he was in a strong enough position to interfere directly in Afghanistan’s internal afairs. On 9 September two Tunisian al-Qa‘ida operatives disguised as journalists were granted an interview with Ahmad Shah Mas‘ud. During their meeting they exploded a bomb concealed in a video camera, which killed themselves, Mas‘ud and several of his aides. It was the frst, but tragically not the last, instance of a suicide bombing in Afghanistan. Two days later, on 11 September 2001, nineteen Arabs, mostly citizens of Saudi Arabia, hijacked four American passenger planes and crashed two of them into the World Trade Center in New York and a third into the Pentagon. Te fourth plane, intended to attack the White House, crashed in a feld afer its passengers bravely fought the hijackers. In all more than 3,000 people died in the 9/11 attacks, including six Pakistani citizens, and thousands more were injured." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.220.26.234 (talk) 17:11, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why an illustration?

The image makes the article look childish. Why not a photograph instead? 72.46.217.176 (talk) 05:11, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, that drawing is awful. We've often had problems with photographs uploaded as allegedly free of copyright when they really weren't, so there may well be no readily available alternative on the wiki right now, but a photograph uploaded under our non-free content rules really ought to work. Fut.Perf. 06:12, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, the image is bad for encyclopedic purposes (no offense to the artist). – Illegitimate Barrister (talkcontribs), 21:22, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:51, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]