This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Hazara ( inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hazara, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.HazaraWikipedia:WikiProject HazaraTemplate:WikiProject HazaraHazara articles Afghanistan High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Afghanistan, a project to maintain and expand Afghanistan-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AfghanistanWikipedia:WikiProject AfghanistanTemplate:WikiProject AfghanistanAfghanistan articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Geography Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Geography To-do list: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{ WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles. Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes Map : See Wikipedia requested maps Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability Photo : See Wikipedia requested photographs of places Stubs : See Geography stubs Central Asia Mid‑importance Hazarajat is part of WikiProject Central Asia, a project to improve all Central Asia-related articles. This includes but is not limited to Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Tibet, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Xinjiang and Central Asian portions of Iran, Pakistan and Russia, region-specific topics, and anything else related to Central Asia. If you would like to help improve this and other Central Asia-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.Central AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Central AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Central AsiaCentral Asia articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on 19 November 2007. The result of the discussion was Keep.

I have reverted to February 2006 to remove a copyvio cut-and-paste from http://www.geocities.com/manji_azra/Hazarajat.html. There may be some bits that were added on subsequently that were not modifications of the copyvio text, if someone wants to search the history, but getting rid of the copyright violation takes precedence. - Banyan Tree 01:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC) reply

Same text has been incorporated and removed again. – Whpq 21:20, 3 October 2007 (UTC) please translate this to persian thanks. reply

Everything in this article is false, there is no officially named place in Afghanistan that is called Hazarajat. This article is stupid which is made by Hazara nationalists.-- Panjshiri-Tajik ( talk) 01:20, 19 November 2007 (UTC) reply

I have removed the speedy tag and am sending this to AfD because I think this is too contentious a matter not to warrant some discussion by the Wikipedia community. I take no position, just want to see the right thing done, that's all. Accounting4Taste: talk 01:42, 19 November 2007 (UTC) reply

Since the place is verifiably real, I will add some basic sources and apply some minor cleanup. Some of the numbers in the infobox seem inflated compared to neutral 3rd party sources, but the article is no hoax. • Gene93k ( talk) 07:45, 20 November 2007 (UTC) reply

Afghanistan's total population is approximately 30 million, Pashtuns being 42%, Tajik (27%), Hazara (9%), Uzbek (9%), Aimak (4%), Turkmen (3%), Baluch (4%) and other small groups (4%). 9% of 30 million is not 9 million but less than 3 million. All the Hazaras of Afghanistan (which is 9% of the total population of Afghanistan) do not live in this mountainous region called by them as Hazarajat, many of them also live OUTSIDE of Hazarajat, in non-Hazara cities such as Kabul, Mazari Sharif, Herat, Kandahar, etc. So the maximum number is 2.5 million which I placed, but it may be even less than that. Britannica is not reliable source, anyone can change the info there.-- Panjshiri-Tajik ( talk) 14:42, 20 November 2007 (UTC) reply

Panjshiri-Tajik said: "Britannica is not reliable source, anyone can change the info there." It is very difficult to change the text of the 1911 Encyc. Britannica, it was printed. In addition to the electronic versions available on the web, some of us have printed copies. -- Bejnar ( talk) 04:55, 24 November 2007 (UTC) reply

If Panjshiri-Tajik doesn't like the Encyclopedia Britannica, how does she/he feel about the Encyclopedia Iranica which has an article on Hazaúrajaút at: "Historical Geography of Hazaúrajaút"? -- Bejnar ( talk) 21:05, 24 November 2007 (UTC) reply

Reverting all changes by sock-puppet Panjshiri-Tajik also brought back the sourcing problems for the removed restored content. The statements in this article need to cite neutral and WP:RELIABLE third-party sources. • Gene93k ( talk) 08:23, 28 November 2007 (UTC) reply

I just reverted changes by anonymous user 122.148.70.11, which restored copyvio of The mother land Hazarajat page [1]. • Gene93k ( talk) 03:38, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply

Another editor recently moved this entire page to Hazarastan with no discussion whatsoever. First off, it's pretty inappropriate to move the article without even floating the idea on the Talk page. Secondly, the term "Hazarajat" has around 10,000 gBooks hits, "Hazaristan" some 312, and "Hazarastan" about 10. So clearly common usage in English favours the term "Hazarajat" for this reason.

The other editor cited as motive the fact that the term "Hazarajat" has negative implications in Afghanistan, and is associated with stereotypes of the Hazara as poor and uneducated. While that may be the case, it doesn't outweight the fact that "Hazarajat" is the common English term. Further, that area does truly have significant development and economic problems, so there's not point in trying to whitewash that away with a name-change. The term "Appalachian" has a lot of negative associations in English, but we don't suddenly start calling the area something different just because it has problems.

Reverting back to "Hazarajat", and would ask that other editors keep an eye out for folks inserting Hazara nationalist viewpoints into what is probably one of the more popular articles on Hazara issues on WP. MatthewVanitas ( talk) 18:39, 10 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the reminding me of the problems, exactly that is the case that I have moved the articles and I am not angry for the revert action you did on this article but happy to remind me. I will expand the articles but will not change it again, I ask you User: MathewVanitas to keep eye on hazara articles because there are some elements which is constantly does not want to see Hazara articles to be expanded. Thanks Ehussain ( talk) 20:46, 10 October 2010 (UTC) reply

No problem, that's why we can talk it out on the Talk page. I definitely agree that it's important to make sure anti-Hazara editors don't make inaccurate or uncited additions to Hazara articles, but it is equally necessary that pro-Hazara editors not add uncited or unsubstantiated material out of a misguided desire to promote the Hazara cause. The best course for everyone is to present the topic neutrally with citations to reputable academic sources. MatthewVanitas ( talk) 04:02, 11 October 2010 (UTC) reply

A simple understanding of Afghan Dari reveals the insulting nature of the name Hazarajat - there are three suffixes used to create a plural in Afghan Dari, 1) ها or ha - can be used for all words; 2) ان or an - used only for animate things; and 3) جات or jat - used only for inanimate objects. I recognize that Hazarajat does have wide usage and should be retained - but users should be informed in some way that the term Hazarajat is offensive to some Hazara. It is true that I do not have an academic citation for the offensive nature of the term - what I have is conversations with Hazara in Afghanistan that verify the perception. DavisGL ( talk) 03:49, 16 March 2011 (UTC) reply

That's fine, but again it needs to be something documented that we can cite. There's a reason Wikipedia isn't based on Original Research ( WP:OR); we can't just take anonymous editors at their word as to academic points. If you have any reliable footnote stating that Hazarajat is derogatory, by all means include it in an etymology section, but not until there's some cite for it. Conversing with people and coming to a conclusion is pretty much the definition of OR. That said, if you're compiling data and get your findings published in a reputable academic or journalistic publication, then I'd be happy to footnote to that. MatthewVanitas ( talk) 04:19, 16 March 2011 (UTC) reply

I do understand your point about original research and the need for citation, at the same time I would ask whether it would require an academic citation to say that when Jesse Jackson referred to NYC as "Hymietown"(sp?) it was an offensive reference. Isn't some language self-evident? I can see that an explanation of why a phrase in a foreign language is offensive would be in order as well. DavisGL ( talk) 17:26, 16 March 2011 (UTC) reply

The -stan suffix is common in a familiar and accepted part of the English language. It is used in the names of nation-states such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Uzbekistan. Similarly it is used to note regions that are not independent states such as Pashtunistan. Lacking a consensus from the Hazara community, Hazarastan seems to be a more logical name for the English language page about this region than Hazarajat. 500Afs ( talk) 13:31, 20 October 2011 (UTC) reply

You do have a point but the issue is the history where the region has always been reffered to as Hazarajat. I believe, in recent years some people (Hazara nationalists) have raised the issue, where they prefer it to be called as Hazarastan. The region is refered as Hazarajat in books and history, only in recent years few nationalist writers have referred to region as Hazarastan which can not be the reason to change the name of the region or just because few people want it so. Hazara Birar ^(Talk) 17:37, 21 October 2011 (UTC) reply

I believe enough info and references are provided for the article, therefore, the tags should be deleted. I don't how does removing tags work? anybody?

I believe a lot more work is still needed on the article, i m going to double check its relevancy, grammar, references etc as soon as possible, there is one thing else, I don't know if i have put the topics in right order, please change if you think it has to be in a different order.

Please rate the article when you read it!

One last thing, I will adding a wiki table, which will list the provinces and districts that are part of Hazarajat, as a whole or partly. any suggestion talk to me!

Hazara-Birar ( talk) 21:09, 31 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Removed the tag, provided enough references. Hazara-Birar ( talk) 12:30, 17 September 2011 (UTC) reply

I hadn't looked at this article in a while, but am very pleased to see that it has substantially improved in layout, footnoting, etc. over the last few years. Props to those who've put in the effort to make this article, fundamental to an understanding of Afghanistan and of the Hazara people, increasingly accurate, organised, and credible. MatthewVanitas ( talk) 20:47, 27 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Thanks for appreciation. We used to have many active Wikipedians working on these articles but I don't see them around much :( Thanks on their behalf as well :) Hazara Birar ^(Talk) 07:23, 29 March 2012 (UTC) reply

An image used in this article, File:Bamian valley.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 31 October 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 05:27, 31 October 2011 (UTC) reply

User:Gharjistan replaced the map with a map from 1890]] without a talk. Please discuss it first before replacing it.

I believe, the map that shows current speculated borders of Hazarajat should be there no old maps. Old maps can be part of articles but not the infobox image. Thanks Hazara Birar ^(Talk) 11:59, 31 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hazarajat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110725081441/http://www.ilep.org.uk/fileadmin/uploads/Country_Pages/Afghanistan/Afghanistan.pdf to http://www.ilep.org.uk/fileadmin/uploads/Country_Pages/Afghanistan/Afghanistan.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{ source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:30, 6 December 2017 (UTC) reply

There were a number of spots where the text did not make very much sense. On investigating the history, it seemed like the primary culprit was a series of edits in April 2020 by Idrees Pazhwak with a very clear pro-Pashtun, anti-Hazara bent (to the point of literally substituting Pashtuns for Hazara in discussing the activities of the Boundary Commission). Much of the original text was decently sourced and the edits clearly unjustified, so I did my best to restore content that has been lost. I realize the ethnic dynamics of the region are complex and undoubtedly still disputable, so I'm sure additional improvement and nuance would be welcome. -- Michael Snow ( talk) 19:12, 20 August 2021 (UTC) reply

The name Hazaristan has no notable reference. The only place I have heard and seen is the Hazara nationalist websites and discussions. I am suggesting to have Hazaristan removed and have a section, maybe 'other names' or something similar where we can mention Hazaristan. Please provide suggestions and feedback. Thanks Hazara Birar ^(Talk) 07:27, 27 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Any inputs would be appreciated. Hazara Birar ^(Talk) 04:32, 8 November 2022 (UTC) reply

For those of you who have constantly been against changing this page from Hazarajat to Hazaristan, I say, you are uninformed.

Do you even know from when this region in Afghanistan started to be called Hazarajat?

Do you know what it was called before?

Do you even understand why more and more Hazara people in this day and age have started to say Hazaristan and stopped saying Hazarajat?

This part is not correct --> "Hazarajat" is a compound of "Hazara" and the Dari suffix "jat", which is used to make words associated with land in the south, central and west Asia.

Wait... What? "Jat" is a Dari suffix used to make words associated with land in the south, central and west Asia? What the hell are you talking about...!? "Jat" is used in words like for example instead of saying vegetable you say multiple vegetables, then you say in Dari "sabsi-jat". Sabsi = vegetable. Sabsi-jat = vegetables. Do you understand where I am going with this point? Or should I just keep on going and giving example after example on the use of "Jat" in Dari...!?

Hazarajat was Hazaristan. Hazaristan changed to Hazarajat due to Abdur Rahman Khan claiming that Hazaristan (which literally means Land of Hazaras) is a wrong term for the geography because there are not so many Hazaras living in the region. There are a few. Hazaristan therefor became Hazarajat. Since then in every historybook regarding Afghanistan and Hazaras, whenever the region has been brought up or mentioned it has been used as the Hazarajat term. Abdur Rahman Khan made sure of this change taking place.

More and more Hazaras including a lot of Hazara historians feel that Hazarajat in actuality is an indirect insult to the Hazara people.

I will later on come back and update you with links to references that will show and prove that Hazarajat is in fact incorrect and that it has been, is, will and should be Hazaristan. Siggs savache ( talk) 07:40, 13 September 2023 (UTC) reply

In Wikipedia we follow WP:RS, not the personal analysis/opinion of users. See also WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS and WP:COMMONNAME. -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 15:28, 13 September 2023 (UTC) reply

A reliable source claims that it is Hazaristan. ^[1]-- 175.106.53.155 ( talk) 04:39, 14 September 2023 (UTC) reply

The source simply says “Hazaristan”, that doesn’t change anything. No one is denying that “Hazaristan” is also used in WP:RS. HistoryofIran ( talk) 12:50, 14 September 2023 (UTC) reply

@ 175.106.53.155: The name of the article should always be first, not the name you personally prefer. Can you please revert yourself and read WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS and WP:COMMONNAME? -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 18:58, 14 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Nvm, it's a sock of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HazaraHistorian. I'll make the SPI in a bit. -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 19:07, 14 September 2023 (UTC) reply

To all of the Hazara historians on Wikipedia and anybody that believes that Hazarajat has a flag, don’t add a flag. Hazarajat has no official flag so we can not add a flag to it, or you either keep the new Afghan flag from 2021 which is your only choice.

Those Hazara historians should not add the unsourced blue-white-yellow tricolor flag, or I can say Chile’s first flag (Patria Vieja) to resemble this part of region in Afghanistan and for their own ethnic group, where Hazara nationalists had started this online movement on TikTok recently which isn’t recognized in any part of the world. Nobody recognizes this flag besides historians and vexillologists who know that this was Chile’s first flag but it had gone to waste, and nobody uses that same flag anymore. Shinwari93 ( talk) 16:11, 22 November 2023 (UTC) reply