Talk:2004 in Afghanistan

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

Merge suggestion for months of 2004[edit]

I suggest that all months for 2004, should be merged into one article 2004 in Afghanistan Jez    20:21, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done Jez t e C 20:28, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the section on 2004-05-25, the bit in bold, it is unclear whose soldiers were injured. Leftover sentence fragment perhaps?:

U.S. planes helped Afghan National Army forces attack suspected Taliban forces in the mountains of the Arghistan district in Kandahar province, Afghanistan, killing some 20 suspected insurgents at a recently discovered camp. Three of his Afghan soldiers were injured. --Cfailde 21:08, 2004 Aug 8 (UTC)

  • Thanks for proofreading! I'll fix it. Kingturtle 01:23, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • I think you may have deleted the wrong line. How about reinserting The three men were sentenced to between two and ten years in prison. and removing Three of his Afghan soldiers were injured. --Cfailde 09:34, 2004 Aug 9 (UTC)
THE ABOVE WAS MERGED FROM Timeline of Afghanistan (May 2004) Jez t e C 20:18, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help this article out with CITES[edit]

Merge tags have been on related timeline articles for 2001 in Afghanistan / 2002 in Afghanistan and 2003 in Afghanistanfor some time. I have now merged these many articles, into three distinct years. Once these are tidy, i will contemplate starting on 2005 in Afghanistan / 2006 in Afghanistan / 2007 in Afghanistan / 2008 in Afghanistan / 2009 in Afghanistan.. However WE NEED HELP! Not one item is cited. Some of the info is very petty. Please help clean these articles up, as there are lots of wounded soldier stories / rockets fired at base, no injuries or damage, so am going to do a big edit and remove these. Jez t e C 21:35, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 12:32, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An editor provided the archive info. --Bejnar (talk) 22:38, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non encyclopedic[edit]

In accord with comments above, this appears to be more of a source document for writing history, in other words just a collection of notes. This is exactlywhat Wikipedia is not. It might be possible to write an article about Afghanistan in 2004, but this is not an article as it now stands. --Bejnar (talk) 22:38, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]