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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan 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.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion 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.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
This has always been known as a Mazari cap until it was rebranded as a "Pashteen hat" after Manzoor Pashteen. It doesn't make sense for you to give its name as Pashteen due one person, similarly to how we don't title the Karakul hat as the Jinnah hat.
Thanks Foxhound03 (talk) 09:33, 31 July 2020 (UTC) I agree with that point. This hat was historical known as "Mazari hat" as it is still in its place of origin in North-Afghanistan and came to its existing by this name. Calling it "Pashteen hat" in the article name after someone who just wore that hat as a trademark but had nothing to do with its creation or history is simply inappropriate, like you would also not call the article name of the Pakol hat "Massoud hat". Besides that the name "Pashteen hat" itself is highly misleading as this suggests the reader a Pashtun origin of the hat. It is okay to mention this name variation in a second phrase but defenitely not as the name of the article. No consensus here! A change of the article name seems more than necessary![reply]