Talk:Kandahar Province/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Kandahar Province. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
my E-mail address in kandhar is agha_hameedagha@yahoo.com
Was Kandahar Airport built in the 1960s or 1970s? The article says both.
Article states that there are 17 districts but only names 16
I read through it quickly. I noticed that Zhari district is missing. That's probably the 17th district not named. Zhari is made up from the northern part of Panjway district. It's beween Maiwand and Arghendab. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iuventuis 1 (talk • contribs) 21:30, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Economy.
If Kandahar is an agricultural state, how can most of its agricultural assets be unavailable because of wartime depredations?
This section needs some improvement, I would say.Uniquerman (talk) 23:28, 19 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uniquerman (talk • contribs) 23:28, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Persian
how can only 1% speak persian in the province when Tajiks and Hazaras make-up 28% of Kandahar city.--Inuit18 (talk) 06:18, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
- MRRD clearly points out that Pashto is spoken by 98% of the total population. Baluchi, Dari and other languages are spoken by the remaining 2% of the population. Baluchi = 8000 people, Dari = 4000 people and others = 19000. (Ketabtoon (talk) 06:24, 21 September 2010 (UTC))
If Tajiks and Hazaras make up 28% of Kandahar City, with a population approaching half a million, then they are by definition roughly 16% of the total population of Kandahar Province. 98% of the people in Kandahar may speak Pashto, but clearly 16% speak Parsi as their primary language.Uniquerman (talk) 19:27, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Population Discrepancy
The article states that roughly 800,000 people live in the capital city (Kandahar), yet it lists the population of the Kandahar district (which contains Kandahar city) as just under 500,000 people. I suspect that the 500,000 is the correct number because the New York Times article referenced gives that number. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.222.239.155 (talk) 20:13, 21 April 2011 (UTC)