Talk:Faisalabad

World Gazetteer populations of localities in Faisalabad area

• Faisalabad City: 2,582,175
• Chak Jhumra: 38,059
• Jaranwala: 122,044
• Sammundri: 68,528
• Tandlianwala: 38,864
• Dijkot: 28,093
• Khurianwala: 36,093
• Mamu Kanjan: 32,639

Which Lyall?

Confusion over Sir James Lyall vs Sir Charles James Lyall has been resolved. It's Sir James Lyall. See discussion: Talk:Charles James Lyall#City named after him

Which Sir James Lyall was Lyallpur named after? Charles James Lyall or James Broadwood Lyall? The source given in our article and the Encyclopedia Britannica article say it's Charles James Lyall, the Lt. Governon of Punjab. Fine, but this seems self-contradictory as this Lyall doesn't appear to have ever been a Governon of Punjab (not mentioned in his article, seems unlikely given the rest of his career, doesn't appear in List of governors of Punjab (British India)). James Broadwood Lyall on the other hand was a Lt. Governor of Punjab, and roughly at the same time that the city was founded, and in the History section of the current article there's mention of his involvement in its creation. The sources I've encountered so far mostly simply say "James Lyall, the Lt. Governor of Punjab" without indicating which of the two that is [1] [2]). It seems most reasonable that this is James Broadwoood Lyall, and that the sources that have it as Charles James Lyall are in error. Any thoughts? Noting there was an earlier discussion in 2011. – Uanfala (talk) 15:30, 14 April 2017 (UTC) It was Charles James Lyall . I linked to the book, and also updated the Lyall bio. Atsme📞📧 15:45, 14 April 2017 (UTC) How do you know? My point was that the claim in the book, which you've now copied to Charles' article, is unreliable. – Uanfala (talk) 15:49, 14 April 2017 (UTC) Adding that The 1911 edition of EB has that as James Broadwood Lyall. – Uanfala (talk) 15:52, 14 April 2017 (UTC) Sorry, but you are incorrect. There is not just one claim in one book. There are numerous. Perhaps you would be kind enough to cite more RS instead? The James Broadwood Lyall info is incorrect and needs to be corrected throughout Wikipedia. He was never the Lt. Gov of Punjab. A simple Google searches show you numerous RS that Charles James Lyall was the Lt. Gov. The links that showed James Broadwood were WP links. See page 257 and tell me where it says he was ever Lt. Gov. The same applies to numerous other sources. Atsme📞📧 16:18, 14 April 2017 (UTC) The source you now linked to gives James Broadwood as a Lt. Governor of Punjab, while mentioning nothing of the sort for Charles James. – Uanfala (talk) 16:22, 14 April 2017 (UTC) I'm finding mixed information...give me a minute, and if you can, please research as well. Atsme📞📧 16:43, 14 April 2017 (UTC) (edit conflict) You're wrong, Atsme. See the discussion at Talk:Charles James Lyall also. - Sitush (talk) 16:44, 14 April 2017 (UTC) Yes, that's where I posted a long list of RS that support my position. Tag, you're it. Atsme📞📧 22:27, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• D ground.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:51, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

RfC to select best image for the infobox

There is a clear consensus that "option A: Clocktower daytime scene", File:Clocktower Faisalabad, Panorama.jpg, better represents the city clocktower for the infobox when compared to "option B: Clocktower night scene", File:Clock Tower Faisalabad by Usman Nadeem.jpg. One RfC participant noted:

Why does it have to be limited to just these two, when commons has a fair few more to choose from, such as this one which is a better angle than the suggested daylight (A) one, but more natural in portrayal than the night (B) one. Personally, I am not particularly convinced by either of the two suggested, but would ask why any others available aren't under consideration?

There is no prejudice against opening a new RfC to discuss whether another image would be better than A.

Cunard (talk) 23:45, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

(A) Clocktower daytime scene

(B) Clocktower night scene

Choose one of the following two images that best represents the city clocktower for the infobox: (A) or (B). 16:47, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Survey

• A - a more realistic view. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 16:47, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
• A probably, although I was initially going to recommends B. scope_creep^Talk 13:37, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
• A. While B is a much more striking image (perhaps a good fit for Clock Tower, Faisalabad) - it shows less of surrounding city and is less realistic - particularly the light lines. Icewhiz (talk) 10:14, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Discussion

• Why does it have to be limited to just these two, when commons has a fair few more to choose from, such as this one which is a better angle than the suggested daylight (A) one, but more natural in portrayal than the night (B) one. Personally, I am not particularly convinced by either of the two suggested, but would ask why any others available aren't under consideration? Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:33, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Bold edits

Wasi Haider, the montage in the infobox looks good and what I consider to be an improvement to the article. Having said that, I do believe it is important that I alert you to the long standing RfC discussion directly above this section. You reverted the clocktower image despite WP:Consensus policy. The RfC close states: There is no prejudice against opening a new RfC to discuss whether another image would be better than A. For future reference, if you had simply started a discussion here first, it would have been the best approach and least controversial. Articles that have been promoted to WP:GA and WP:FA status typically have "stewards" watching them. I realize that you are a new editor and I want to encourage you to edit wisely, learn our policies, and be mindful of past talk page discussions and RfCs before making bold edits, particularly articles that have been promoted. Happy editing! ^Atsme _Talk 📧 17:05, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Ok thanks 👍 Wasi Haider (talk) 18:57, 12 April 2020 (UTC)