User talk:Tajik Panjsheri

Links to draft articles

Please do not introduce links in actual articles to draft articles, as you did to Panjshir offensives (Soviet–Afghan War) and Ahmad Shah Massoud. Since a draft is not yet ready for the main article space, it is not in shape for ordinary readers, and links from articles should not go to a draft. Such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been removed. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 16:59, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i apologize I didn't know Tajik Panjsheri (talk) 17:02, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i just wanted to do it so a moderator could review it, It won't happen again 😁 Tajik Panjsheri (talk) 17:03, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: First Panjshir Offensive (October 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by RangersRus was:

Reason for declining is to make improvement per sources. Per source Galeotti, Mark (2021-10-28). The Panjshir Valley 1980–86: The Lion Tames the Bear in Afghanistan, casualties and victory were not the accurate result as you have on the page. This source disputes the result you have on the page. Please make improvement and corrections and resubmit.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:First Panjshir Offensive and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

RangersRus (talk) 13:25, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added the Soviet claim for Causalties but you are wrong with the victory claim, the source said both claimed victories and discussed each victory both sides fulfilled, But did not pick a side. (Which I quite literally pointed out in the article) Michael A Barry however states it as a loss and I can find plenty more sources calling it one , ❤️ Tajik Panjsheri (talk) 18:42, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that is what I said that Galeotti does not say it was Mujahideen victory but both sides claimed victory. This is also considered "disputed" and you have to refer to sources why it is disputed. Infobox should show result disputed or both claimed victory and attribute the source. Result segment should also show as such. Galeotti also says that "The rebels likewise claimed to have inflicted severe casualties on the attackers, downing no fewer than ten helicopters, and losing just four men. These last claims are highly dubious, but the point is that the rebels did not seek to confront the attackers on their own terms, rather to withdraw in good order and then regroup afterwards." Can you also give inline citation to Barry source saying that casualties on Mujahideen side was 4? Need verification. To approve a page all sources have to be verified with inline citation. RangersRus (talk) 23:37, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

its disputed but a none biased author who was present in Afghanistan claimed it was a mujahideen Victory, do you understand ? And okay then I will change the casualty part to dubious but the results should stay the same, you can check the battle source I have citation for it but if you want to see the actual source we can text somewhere else but it's in page 181 and says

"Les modjahedîn souffrirent quatre tués, mais les canon- nades des chars en fuite causèrent vingt-cinq morts parmi la population civile au bord du chemin. Cette dispropor- tion entre le nombre de pertes civiles, par rapport à celles essuyées par les combattants, soit presque six contre un, restera la règle dans le pays entier, jusqu'à la fin de la guerre soviéto-afghane."

Nonetheless it doesn't matter if both claimed victories, just because one side claimed a victory doesn't mean they have to be right, mark galeotti also mentioned in panjshir 2 that both sides claimed victory but the mujahideen won instead, it's just in the first offensive he did not say anything Tajik Panjsheri (talk) 00:18, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Every claim has to be sourced. From the sources you have on the page, result is clearly disputed as both sides claimed victory. If you find a reliable source that specifically says Mujahideen victory, it is still disputed because the source Goletti does not say so. Refer to example Battle of the Catalaunian Plains for disputed results. For dispute about casualties refer to example Battle of Kannauj. RangersRus (talk) 01:30, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

but brother, just because soviets proclaimed victory doesn't mean it has to be true, For example mark galeotti mentioned That in the second Panjshir offensive both claimed victory, but it was the mujahideen that won, do you understand? Just because the soviets claimed victory doesn't mean that for example ohhh we must change the source to dispute, for example in the Armenian genocide 1,500,000 people died, but the ottomans denied it, does that mean Armenian genocide must be "disputed"? No because there is evidence etc that it actually happened, that's why the ottoman claim does not matter. Same here, The Soviet claim does not matter as they suffered much casualties, did not deal a high blow to the mujahideen, the mujahideen regained control of panjshir, and the soviets withdrew, and the withdrawal of the soviets increased the moral of the panjshiris incredibly, do you understand brother?

Just because galeotti does not say anything, does not mean he posited it as a disputed battle, he just mentioned both sides claimed victory and Michael a Barry proclaimed the battle as a mujahideen Victory and that's that ❤️ Tajik Panjsheri (talk) 08:48, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to help and made things very clear with examples. We are not talking about Panjshir 2 here but about this article and the discrepancies. Galeotti says both sides claimed victory in the source about this offensive and I do not see Barry's victory claim in the source but if he did that I missed, it is disputed. I am going to leave this for others reviewers to review. RangersRus (talk) 14:42, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

please do but you do not understand my arguement brother, ofcourse the soviets will say it is their victory but which none biased neutral source has affirmed it is their victory? no one, and I will cite Michael Barry then in the results section then

i only mentioned Panjshir 2 to you to make it clear that just because both sides claimed victory does not mean results have to be "disputed", but can also be mujahideen Victory like how Michael a Barry affirmed it was a mujahideen Victory, and how Galeotti mentioned Panjshir 2 as mujahideen Victory e Tajik Panjsheri (talk) 14:59, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i don't know how to cite în a battle box, but Michael Barry states it as a victory in the second citation in "results" thing. Tajik Panjsheri (talk) 15:03, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

alright I'll fix casualties Tajik Panjsheri (talk) 08:48, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively as a sockpuppet of User:Tajik Sohrabs per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tajik Sohrabs. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Izno (talk) 00:38, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]