Jump to content

Talk:Pakistan: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 199: Line 199:
[[Special:Contributions/67.250.9.167|67.250.9.167]] ([[User talk:67.250.9.167|talk]]) 05:10, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
[[Special:Contributions/67.250.9.167|67.250.9.167]] ([[User talk:67.250.9.167|talk]]) 05:10, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
:{{notdone}} Give a source that says Persian is an ''official'' language as you claim. Being spoken in different areas, which is probably true, doesn't make it official. --[[User:Hassanhn5|lTopGunl]] ([[User talk:Hassanhn5|talk]]) 13:01, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
:{{notdone}} Give a source that says Persian is an ''official'' language as you claim. Being spoken in different areas, which is probably true, doesn't make it official. --[[User:Hassanhn5|lTopGunl]] ([[User talk:Hassanhn5|talk]]) 13:01, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

== Edit request from , 10 November 2011 ==

{{edit semi-protected|answered=no}}
<!-- Begin request -->


<!-- End request -->
[[Special:Contributions/208.125.3.245|208.125.3.245]] ([[User talk:208.125.3.245|talk]]) 04:01, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:01, 10 November 2011

Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 29, 2006.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 10, 2006Good article nomineeListed
March 11, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
March 25, 2006Featured article candidatePromoted
April 22, 2009Featured article reviewDemoted
January 24, 2010Peer reviewReviewed
March 29, 2010Good article nomineeNot listed
  • Error: 'FGAN' is not a valid current status for former featured articles (help).
WikiProject iconSoftware: Computing
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software 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.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Template:VA Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

WikiProject iconGuild of Copy Editors
WikiProject iconThis article was copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors.

No mention of terrorism? Why?

So a militant insurgency is in full swing. Wars are being fought in waziristan and Bin Laden was found and killed here. Yet no mention of terrorism? Ironic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.245.35 (talk) 17:13, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We do mention terrorism in the lead, and the war in Waziristan also gets mentioned in the article. Bin Laden, on the other hand, is hardly of national importance to Pakistan. Huon (talk) 17:31, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well I came to look up and read on the issue and found no headings devoted to it. From an external perspective terrorism is one of the defining characteristics of Pakistan - hence it must find a visible and easily accessible mention on this page (a heading). My comment says nothing about the 'importance' of Bin Laden to Pakistan, wonder where you got that from ... However it is indeed true that he was killed deep in the heart of Pakistani territory. Please note that this is an encyclopedia article - a narration of facts and not a presentation of a view point.
I agree that the current instability - both the terrorism and the conflict in Waziristan - could get a more prominent mention. Right now we're very short on those subjects. I doubt there's enough for an entire section on terrorism, though. The main article on terrorism in Pakistan suffers from POV and sourcing problems, and it's not all that long to begin with. I just checked other countries' articles for comparison, and nothing short of a full-scale civil war seems to get its own section; minor insurrections, domestic terrorist campaigns and the like are usually covered rather shortly. Regarding Bin Laden: Yes, he was found in Pakistan. So what? Nazi doctor Josef Mengele died in Brazil, which doesn't get mentioned in the Brazil article. Adolf Eichmann was caught in Argentina - no mention. Terrorist Carlos the Jackal was apprehended in Sudan - no mention. Terrorists of the pro-Basque ETA are captured all over Europe - no mention, not even in the Spain article. So why should Bin Laden get mentioned in the Pakistan article? Huon (talk) 19:43, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I, for a fact, find it rather ironic that whenever the usual terrorism talk starts in on this talk page, the proposer tends to have some sort of connection to India. The contributions of the IP user above are no exception. His claim that terrorism is "one of the defining characters" of Pakistan and that there should be a whole section in this article "devoted" to a war in an area (the Afghanistan border) that is insignificant for the majority of 187 million people, speaks volumes about some people's POV perspective when it comes to this article, and their "presentation of a view point." I agree with the comment by Huon above; Osama bin Laden is a Saudi national and not Pakistani. The fact that he was killed in Pakistan does not override the fact that he's an Arab from Saudi Arabia and is irrelevant to Pakistan. Before living in Pakistan, he also spent countless years in Afghanistan and Sudan. If anything, he should be more prominently mentioned on the Saudi Arabia article - not here. This is the wrong place. Mar4d (talk) 09:19, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not the OP, and not a jingoist. But Are you living in denial or a rabbit hole? http://www.cfr.org/pakistan/pakistans-new-generation-terrorists/p15422 <- I can easily see why the OP or any lay person would assume terrorism is indeed a defining characteristic of Pakistan. Rather than pass judgement on the OP's alleged perspective, can you provide any substantive evidence based arguments to establish why his/her statement is a mere claim? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.107.0.69 (talk) 03:22, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciations given in English? Why?

Why are there three pronunciations given for the country name? The proper and correct pronunciation can only be the one in the local language, i.e the Urdu pronunciation, why give two other weirdly accented American pronunciations? Should one give the Urdu pronunciation of America (Umreeka) on the page for the United States? Besides, the correct pronunciation isn't that difficult. --Minigilani (talk) 06:42, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please remove the English pronunciations of the country name.

This is the English Wikipedia so the pronunciation for English should be there. --Jnorton7558 (talk) 09:34, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Shahzadsattar, 21 September 2011

Dear Editor you on the article of Pakistan you mansion that badshahi mosque was build in 1973 it is wrong, it was build in 1773 please make sure thanks Shahzadsattar (talk) 06:05, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the image; we already have another one of Badshahi Mosque in the history section. Thanks for pointing out the error. Huon (talk) 11:38, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sports

"Pakistan has also won the Hockey World Cup a record four times (1971, 1978, 1982, 1994)." This is a big achievement and it should be mentioned in the first paragraph rather then in the last line. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.248.1.208 (talk) 14:43, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pothwari Couple.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Pothwari Couple.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • 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.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:50, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Even without the copyright problems these images are not reliable sources. If local costumes are deemed notable enough for this article (and to my understanding that's usually not the case), we should have a reliable source discussing them and then use images for illustration - preferably photographs, not drawings. Since there was no context, I have removed the images for now. Huon (talk) 16:26, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This was a serious copyright violation for him. I notified him on his Commons user talk page about these photos. --Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 21:54, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Now a warning Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 23:28, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from , 26 October 2011


110.224.63.110 (talk) 19:08, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How about telling us what edit you request? That might help. Huon (talk) 19:33, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Kamilhamad (talk) 08:21, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Military is under the heading "Politics", Shouldn't it be a separate heading in the article? Kamilhamad (talk) 08:22, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not. I just checked a bunch of other countries for comparison.
  • China, North Korea, South Africa and South Korea indeed have separate sections for their militaries.
  • The United States, Australia, India, Indonesia and Japan have a section on "foreign relations and military".
  • France, Russia, the United Kingdom, Argentina, Brazil, Germany, Israel, Italy and Vietnam group the military as a subsection of "Politics" or something equivalent.
Seems a little arbitrary to me, but apparently there's no consensus to put the military in a separate section. So unless there's a specific reason to change, let's keep it as is. Huon (talk) 11:07, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from , 31 October 2011

article is factually incorrect when it states that "boloywood films are banned since 1965". Bollywood movies are now leagl under some limitations and regularly play in movie theaters

99.51.188.207 (talk) 07:38, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Changed. It would have helped if you had provided a reliable source for the ban's end, though. Huon (talk) 15:20, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:BaburCruise.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:BaburCruise.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:39, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from , 9 November 2011

My request is that you add the following under OFFICIAL LANGUAGES spoken:

~ Persian (Farsi)
Persian is widely spoken in many regions of Pakistan, and therefore it should be added.

      Thankyou

67.250.9.167 (talk) 05:10, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Give a source that says Persian is an official language as you claim. Being spoken in different areas, which is probably true, doesn't make it official. --lTopGunl (talk) 13:01, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from , 10 November 2011


208.125.3.245 (talk) 04:01, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]