Talk:Baghdad

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
e·h·w·Stock post message.svg To-do:
  • Reasonable History section, but Sights and monuments, Business, Geography, Culture and Demographics are too short
  • both miles and kilometers are used to describe distances in the article, it would make more sense to use just one
Priority 1 (top)

Neighborhoods[edit]

Can someone make a map of which areas are Sunni and which are Shia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.58.206.209 (talk) 00:30, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

The Baghdad article is being simply Biased because if you read it carefully you'll immediately notice the Persian nationalistic unfluence on it which is incorrect & manipulated..the name persian is mentioned more than Baghdad, Iraq & Arabic...& by fact Iraq is officially an Arabic country & all this persian propaganda is unnessecary & unacceptable by the Iraqi population...& this accounts for other Iraqi- & Arabic-related articles being manipulated throughout Wikipedia....even in the Iran related articles things are being manipulated in the way that everything is being changed to persian to serve the persian nationalistic intentions even though Iran has lots of Arabic influence on it...,unfortunately Wikipedia is not trustful anymore. Iraswe —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.6.158.33 (talk) 13:45, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Pre-Baghdad[edit]

Can anyone add information, if it is known somewhere, about the cities exiting where Baghdad now is before it became Baghdad?

sorely incomplete/biased article[edit]

2000+ years of history and culture, and half the article is about the last few years?! There's more about recent gallop polls than about the civilization that called Baghdad home for more than a millenia. Ugh, this is why Wikipedia is laughed at... Spookfish 06:26, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree, this article is pitiful. We must have some pictures of Baghdad where the city isn't on fire... Coffee 07:57, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Yes. WTF is this article? There is one sentence about the 300 year Ottoman rule! 76.172.64.179 04:18, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Yes, i agree with you. Baghdad was there before 2000 and recent events are too much explained whereas the real history and roots of this town are not there. And, I think that the term of "Invasion of Iraq" is not appropriate. I think "Liberation of Iraq" would be better.

Etymology[edit]

I think I can add a good etymology section to the article (about the name Baghdad and its origins). I'll try to get it done this weekend.--Zereshk 21:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm confused as to how bagh means god...i can think of many owrds in persian, but bagh is not one of them. if anything, bagh means garden, but with the alef. Kızılderili 22:43, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Pronunciation[edit]

The word Baghdad is frequently used throughout the American media, however it is ALWAYS mispronounced as "bag-dad". Can Wikipedia help (even more) by adding a sound-bite with the proper pronunciation on the main page? -- 192.231.106.2 00:53, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Main image[edit]

The main image at the top of the page (Image:Baghdad.jpg) was a copyright violation from www.robinhocker.com, and has been deleted. You may want to find another suitable image. Proto||type 14:54, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Is it OK if I add an image?Bless sins 21:05, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Baghdad map abbasid.gif

the mayor is ryan seacrest?[edit]

and who does it say is "mayor's bitch?" omg —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.29.211.22 (talkcontribs) .

Distance[edit]

Rather than using just miles or kilometres (as the 'to do' list suggests), it would be useful to use both but in a structured way throughout. For example, X is 13 km (8 miles) from Y. Excluding on measurement would alienate some of the readership.

EVOCATIVEINTRIGUE TALKTOME | EMAILME | IMPROVEME 14:02, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Gas?[edit]

Is there a source for the British using gas attacks to pacify the Iraqis in the 20s? Cos I saw a TV programme which mentioned this once, and it was lambasting the British for hypocrisy because of this, but it said they only PLANNED to use gas, before cancelling because it was too expensive... Indigenius 13:32, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Uum.. since when was baghdad called "penis heads" and nicknamed the "garden of poop"?

Attempting to change..

A lot of...[edit]

Sillyness on this page.

Wait, do you mean it being edited to say fadge? -Guy Person-

¡ ¿ [[ %7e%7e%7e%7e ]][edit]

I do not comprehend that comment; but, it is not signed.

[[ hopiakuta | [[ [[%c2%a1]] [[%c2%bf]] [[ %7e%7e%7e%7e ]] -]] 00:23, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

an nil; An Nil; cbs,...[edit]

Cbs claims peace in this neighborhood: Christian; Sunni; Shiite.

[[ hopiakuta | [[ [[%c2%a1]] [[%c2%bf]] [[ %7e%7e%7e%7e ]] -]] 00:23, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Population[edit]

Firstly there is a mistake on the page regarding Baghdad's compostion; it states that the city is comprised of 60% shia when infact it should be 40% according to several reliable sources. 20:47, 02 March 2008


approximately 6,554,126 inhabitants? After or before the detonation of a bomb? Sorry, but such an accurate approximation is, especially in the case of Baghdad, simply ridiculous - or shall I say stupid? --W-j-s (talk) 00:37, 9 January 2009 (UTC)


Is there any objective evidence that the city was the most populous in the world during any period?Royalcourtier (talk) 22:08, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

British bombing of Iraq[edit]

The account of the British occupation of Iraq in the twenties/thirties is very one-sided! I have changed one patent inaccuracy - the Gernam bombing of London and other British and French targets during the First World War - not to mention retalitory bombing by the allies - was targetted essentially at civilian morale, so that the British (for all their sins) cannot be justly accused of introducing "terror" bombing to the world (at least not in Iraq). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.139.79.82 (talk) 00:33, 16 January 2007 (UTC).

Opening paragraphs[edit]

The third opening paragraph seems to have been partially deleted, but I can't find a version of the article with the full paragraph...can anyone else figure this out? Super Jedi Droid 20:56, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

WHY ?!?!?![edit]

Hi i'm an iraqi dude born and raised in baghdad/ haifa street (which is now an utter ruin) i'v been out from baghdad studying in north cyprus for almost two years, can anyone tell me what the fu*k is going on ?? iraq has been occupied for four years and USA still can't establish security and stabelity is "the United States of America" that weak ???? what the hell is going on ??!?!?!? so many iraqi innocent people killed why ??? i'm away from my home just like millions fled why for the love of god someone tell me ?!?!?!

Anonymous Iraqi

2nd massacre of Baghdad[edit]

I wanted more info on the 2nd massacre of Baghdad, but this article barely mentions it at all (the June 1401 seizure & massacre, under the army of Timur). Harvard yarrd

Naming issue[edit]

We have WP:UE policy. Any doubts that the English name for the city is well established and it is Baghdad? I have move protected the article Alex Bakharev 23:55, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Ethnic Cleansing[edit]

The term doesn't describe what's going on in Baghdad and I'm not sure where it was sourced. Sectarian violence is probably better. Matt Sanchez 03:45, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Many people have described what has happened in Baghdad as "ethnic cleansing." For example, veteran journalist Patrick Cockburn, who has a forthcoming book on the Iraq war, stated earlier this month: "the fall in the death rate is partly because ethnic cleansing has already done its grim work and in much of Baghdad there are no mixed areas left."[1] Siberian Husky (talk) 13:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
I agree ethnic cleansing is the proper term.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 12:01, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Haifa Street[edit]

I was just on Haifa street where the situation has improved drastically. Matt Sanchez 03:47, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Renewable engergy Source[edit]

This section is an absolute joke. Who put this in there and where was it sourced? I've seen NO plans to use solar power beside the scant use of it for street lamps, and even those lamps glow more than light. Renewable electricity and energy is not a priority anywhere in several very wealthy Middle Eastern cities with great security situations. The conservation global warming hysteria is very much a Western construct. Matt Sanchez 03:51, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Coordinates[edit]

Could we please have those damn coordinates as real text so they are easy to copy! instead of this floating over it all pop design. --IceHunter 01:48, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The Name[edit]

Should we say Although there is dispute over its Iranian origin, or should we say Although there is dispute over its Persian origin? Mussav (talk) 07:50, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Read Iranian languages, the dispute is about weather it's Kurdish or Persian, both of which are classified as Iranian languages, so there is no dispute about the Iranian origin of the name.--07fan (talk) 14:55, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
about the dispute of course there is a dispute, it is either "god-given" "God's gift" or "The Given Garden" but we all agree it's Iranian name so no need to add a source, you will ruin the paragraph beside it wasn't a real source, it should be a direct link ;) Mussav (talk) 19:22, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Sights and Monuments Section[edit]

The beginning of this section includes one of the most disastrous run-on sentences I have ever seen. I am just browsing, but perhaps someone involved in this page will repair it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.87.70.194 (talk) 21:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I was "just browsing" as well, but Ive noticed there's no any comment about the loot of the Baghdag's museum, once defined as comparable to the sack of Constantinople. I dont know if there's something that could be done about this, but without that info the articule is simply uncomplete or biased --Oszalał (talk) 19:25, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

The 2 level bridge was actually built in the mid 1990s by Saddam's government, you can see an image of the bridge on the reverse of the 50 dinars dated 1995. No new bridges were built in Baghdad since 2003!

Baghdad City[edit]

I'm a bit confused. The Baghdad Governate page, here, says that the governate is both a province and a city. This page seems to say that there is an actual Baghdad City apart from the governate. What is the square mileage/kilometers of only the City of Baghdad? --Criticalthinker (talk) 01:42, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

This list seems to split the governorate in two parts, Amant Baghdad (or Amanat Baghdad, as other sources spell it) (pop. 5,345,099 in 2005, all urban) and Baghdad outskirts (combined urban + rural pop. 1,438,888 in 2005). But, I don't know if this is a definition mainly for planning purposes or if it has any administrative functions. This Mayorality of Baghdad page says that the governorate is the same as the city. Well, it actually says that the governorate became a city in 1987, so I am not sure what its status is really (governorate, or city at governorate level?). Anyway, I haven't seen any area figures mentioned for the Amanat Baghdad area. Another way of defining the central Baghdad area is by the urban population of the Baghdad governorate, which also includes urban population outside the Amanat Baghdad area, having an estimated total population of 5,906,610 in 2005 and 6,049,276 in 2006. But, the sources don't say if this is a continuous area or consist of several urban places that's not connected with each other.--Pjred (talk) 08:20, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
The official Baghdad City (or Amanat area) consists of 9 districts and 89 neighborhoods. The Baghdad Governorate technically includes only the outer 6 districts (Abu Ghuraib, Mahmoudiya, Mada'in, Al Istiqlal, Al Tarmiya, and Al Taji). However, the Amanat is currently administered as part of Baghdad Governorate. 128.36.27.91 (talk) 19:46, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I just recently discovered that the city and governorate exist as one entity, now. So, both the population listed on the city and governorate page should be the same. Could someone nail down the square mileage of the governorate, though? Both of the pages currently show something different. --Criticalthinker (talk) 06:25, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
This COSIT page says that the area of the Baghdad governorate was 4,843 sq.km in 2003. It seems however, from the information in the Baghdad and Baghdad Governorate articles, that there has been some changes in boundaries after 2003, at least within the governorate. The governorate article lists an area of 4,071 sq.km, but don't mention a source for this. --Pjred (talk) 07:21, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
No, they're not one entity. There are 9 qada in the Amanat (city of Baghdad) and 6 qada that are outside the city but in the governorate. --Polaron | Talk 13:10, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
No, they are governed as one entity. After much research, I've discovered that while there may be statistical divisions, municipally, the city and province are the same thing. City proper pages on wiki are for the government area unless we state specifically that we're only talking about an urban agglomeration. If this page is for the conurbation, we need to state that, specifically. --Criticalthinker (talk) 02:38, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes because the city council was dissolved after the 2005 elections. There is no city government. There is only a governorate council. So in this case, the city proper does not have a government. But the traditional city (amanat) is not coextensive with the governorate. This situation may still change as the new constitution specifies that the amanat is a special area. --Polaron | Talk 12:11, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Transportation?[edit]

what about transportation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.234.173.28 (talk) 20:31, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Wrong image in sidebar[edit]

The image in the sidebar that is captioned "The location of Baghdad within Iraq." shows a central Baghdad streetplan, not the location of the city in the country. --90.218.44.26 (talk) 09:34, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

hip hop —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.116.122.59 (talk) 01:49, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Mayor has no Wiki page?[edit]

I noticed that the governor of Baghdad, Iraq has no Wikipedia page. That surprises me. Someone should create it and I will drastically improve it. --JHawk88 | Talk 12:11, 07 April 2009 (UTC)

Religious conflicts not mentioned?[edit]

I came to this article to see if I could find out what the percentages of the various religious groups in Baghdad were. But I haven't found that, instead there seems to be no mention at all of the different religions. Indeed I couldn't even see any info on the conflict going on in the City. I was trying to figure out whether Baghdad is a predominantly Sunni or Shi’a city (or if its half and half, or something), this seems like pretty basic information to me. Why is this simply left out? --Hibernian (talk) 05:15, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I think Baghdad as the Capital of Iraq, harbors people from all over Iraq. I am not sure but it might quite well reflect the ethno-religious composition of the whole Iraq which is roughly 60 procent *mainly Arab speaking) Shiites, 15% Sunnis Arabs, 20% Sunni Kurds 5% otheres (mainly Assyrians).--Babakexorramdin (talk) 01:17, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Ok, but that still doesn't really solve anything, it's not in the article. There is not even a single mention of what has happened in Baghdad since the War. No mention of the Sunni-Shia civil war, no mention of even a single bombing or massacre, etc. What's going go? I can only assume that there is some deliberate attempt to keep this sort of thing off the page. Maybe it's too controversial or something? --Hibernian (talk) 05:13, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Americans are murderers[edit]

That is all I have to say on this matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.30.105.83 (talk) 22:28, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Baghdad Zoo[edit]

In the discussion of the Baghdad Zoo, L. Paul Bremer is erroneously described as the "Viceroy of Iraq." I have found no reference to this as a legitimate title in the U.S.'s civilian administration of Iraq, and do not doubt that it was included in the article to editorialize. His official title should be changed to "Director of Reconstruction."(http://www.nndb.com/people/289/000023220/) 192.75.254.150 (talk) 17:27, 7 May 2010 (UTC)StefanH.

Diameter[edit]

Is the city composed of "two semicircles of 19 km in diameter", or "a circle about 2 km in diameter"? The article contains both figures. Augurar (talk) 10:59, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Possible Bias?[edit]

Possible Bias in stating it is often the location of terrorist attacks considering these terrorist attacks are more recent, suggest change to state that in recent years it has been the subject of terrorist attacks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.134.244 (talk) 18:41, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Old Baghdad[edit]

the city have two ancient cities :

  • the old city in the eastern side of Tigris river.
  • the Round city in the western side of Tigris river.


פארוק (talk) 22:54, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Silly population claim redundancy....[edit]

the article says..."The population of Baghdad as of 2011 is approximately 7,216,040, making it the most populous city in the country. It is also the largest city in Iraq," That is silly, since the "country" in mind here IS Iraq, so it is not ALSO the largest city in Iraq, since it was just stated to be the largest city in Iraq by using the words "in the country"!!!!!! Geesh.......

It is all rather confusing: in the opening section it says "The population of Baghdad, as of 2016, is approximately 8,765,000". Then, in section Demographics the article states "Baghdad's population was estimated at 7.22 million in 2015". How can the population grow with 1.5 million people in one year?? --Gerard1453 (talk) 18:04, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Demograpics[edit]

Where are they? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.128.18.191 (talk) 06:49, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Source for early occurrences of the name[edit]

If it's true that "The name has been found as Baghdadu on Assyrian cuneiform records of the 9th century BC, and on Babylonian bricks bearing the Royal Seal of King Nebuchadnezzar (6th century BC)" then what's said below about the name originating from two Middle Persian words cannot be correct (no one spoke Middle Persian till 1000 years after Nebuchadnezzar's time). So, if it's true, the rest of the etymology section needs to be revised, but first we need a better source for it than atlastours.net. Other encyclopedia articles about Baghdad that I can find do not make this claim. Andrew Dalby 11:56, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Further reading[edit]

I put some structure to "Further Reading", I hope it's o.k.. --R. la Rue (talk) 22:41, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Timeline of Baghdad[edit]

What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content. Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 16:26, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Baghdad. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:31, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Name[edit]

The claim that the name "Baghdad" - or earlier versions - were used as far back as 2000 BC does not have any proper sources. The "sources" used in this article include a book named "The Woman I Loved" and two very old articles, one from 1899 and one from 1912. None of these sources actually passes WP:SOURCE. According to the authoritative Encyclopaedia of Islam (which is also cited in this article), the name is "undoubtedly Iranian". --Lysozym (talk) 15:47, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

@Lysozym: write a revised and well-weighted etymology section.--111.255.10.49 (talk) 12:29, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Cultural centre[edit]

Baghdad may have been a cultural centre during the periods of Islamic ascendancy, but it doubt that it can be said that it "regained some of its former prominence as a significant center of Arab culture" after the independence of Iraq. It takes more than independence to make a city a significant cultural centre.Royalcourtier (talk) 22:10, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Baghdad. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:49, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Baghdad. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:31, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Repeated, possibly misplaced, possibly inaccurate content[edit]

When reading this article, I noticed two parts of it that seemed to be repeating information from earlier parts, and also seemed to be perhaps (partially) inaccurate and/or in the wrong place. However, I didn't feel knowledgeable enough on this topic to fix these issues, so I'll outline them here in the hopes that someone else can and will. The first part that I found had issues was the following pair of sentences from the "Golden Gate Palace" subsection: "The roundness points to the fact that it was based on Arabic script. The two designers who were hired by Al-Mansur to plan the city's design were Naubakht, a Zoroastrian who also determined that the date of the foundation of the city would be astrologically auspicious, and Mashallah, a Jew from Khorasan, Iran." The second part was the entire "Abbasids and the round city" subsection which immediately follows those sentences.

My issues with the two sentences I quoted are:

  • They seem to be about the roundness and construction of the city, not about the Golden Gate Palace, and thus seem as though they should instead be in the "Foundation" section, where there is other information about the roundness and construction of the city, as well as about those designers.
  • The second sentence, on the "designers", seems to be written as if it is not the case that there is already mention a few paragraphs above, in the "Foundation" section, that "July was chosen as the starting time because two astrologers, Naubakht Ahvazi and Mashallah, believed that the city should be built under the sign of the lion, Leo." These sentences have very similar content to each other, and it seems as though they should be merged, especially as the sentence in the "Golden Gate Palace" section doesn't seem like it belongs there anyway.
  • It seems possibly inaccurate or misleading to say those two people were "The two designers who were hired by Al-Mansur to plan the city's design" (emphasis added), because the idea that just two people by themselves designed the whole city seems implausible, and further it contradicts "Mansur assembled engineers, surveyors, and art constructionists from around the world to come together and draw up plans for the city. Over 100,000 construction workers came to survey the plans; many were distributed salaries to start the building of the city." It's very possible that those two people were among the designers, or even the most important of them, but not the only ones.

However, unfortunately I'm not at all an expert on any of the relevant areas of history, and I haven't got or read the books cited as sources. I was tempted to change or remove these sentences, but I don't feel confident doing so given my lack of knowledge. It's definitely the case that either the "The two designers..." sentence or the "Mansur assembled..." sentences are at least partly misleading, given that they contradict each other, and it seems to me quite likely that the latter is more accurate, but I don't really know precisely what actually happened, so I don't know what changes to make. Further, it's possible that the real mistake is that all of that was meant to refer to the Golden Gate Palace. Then it wouldn't be contradictory, nor seemingly implausible, to say that just those two people had planned it, and it would make sense for the information to be there.

I just don't know what the mistake is. As such, I'd be very grateful if someone who does know more, or has access to the relevant books and is willing to consult the cited pages, would go in and change what's mistaken, which may be as simple as moving the "The roundness points to..." sentence to the "Foundation" section (I assume that sentence is accurate, just misplaced, though again it may have been meant to refer to the roundness of the palace, not the city; I just don't know) and deleting the sentences on "The two designers...".

My issues with the "Abbasids and the round city" subsection are somewhat similar, namely:

  • That section seems to repeat information mentioned earlier (e.g., proximity to Ctesiphon) for no clear purpose.
  • It seems just a jumble of information; I don't know how the sentences are meant to be linked together or why this information is being provided here.
  • "The Abbasids considered themselves the inherittures and the need of Mansur to place the capital in a place that was representative of Arab-Islamic identity by building the House of Wisdom, where ancient texts were translated from their original language, such as Greek, to Arabic" does not make grammatical sense; it seems to be one sentence (up to "inherittures") and then a sentence fragment.
  • Furthermore, "inherittures" is not a word; presumably it's a misspelling of "inheritors".
  • It's unclear how building the House of Wisdom has anything to do with the need to place the capital in a certain type of location. That's a totally separate matter, isn't it?

But in this case, I was able to find an earlier version (from 8 November 2011) of this page that seems to provide some insight into what went wrong (I tried for the other sentences but it was essentially all the same back to 8 November 2011 and I wouldn't have known what to make of it anyway so I gave up). On 8 November 2011, the subsection read:

The Abbasid Caliphate was based on their being the descendants of the uncle of Muhammad and being part of the Quraysh tribe. They used Shi'a resentment, Khorasanian movement, and appeals to the ambitions and traditions of the newly conquered Persian aristocracy to overthrow the Umayyads. The Abbasids sought to combine the hegemony of the Arabic tribes with the imperial, court, ceremonial, and administrative structures of the Persians. The Abbasids considered themselves the inheritors of two traditions: the Arabian-Islamic (bearers of the mantle of Muhammad) and the Persian (successors to the Sassanid monarchs).

These two things are evident from the construction, which is modeled after Persian structures and the need of Mansur to place the capital in a place that was representative of Arab-Islamic identity by building the House of Wisdom, where ancient texts were translated from their original language, such as Greek, to Arabic. Mansur is credited with the "Translation Movement" for this. Further, Baghdad is also near the ancient Sassanid imperial seat of Ctesiphon on the Tigris River.

This seemed to clear up some of the issues relating to grammar, lack of coherence or connection between ideas, reason for repeating information (e.g., now the proximity to the ancient Persian city is relevant to this idea of them trying to highlight their inheritance of the Persian tradition), and that typo. Presumably someone had come in later and changed this sentence, presumably also in good faith, but in a way that was detrimental, misspelling "inheritor" and chopping or moving sentences without realising that meant they no longer really made sense or hung together. As such, I was then tempted to just change this section back to that version.

However, I still don't fully get it. Again that "the need of Mansur" part is ungrammatical and doesn't connect properly, so I assumed it was meant to read something like "These two things are evident from the construction, which is modeled after Persian structures, and from the need of Mansur to place the capital in a place that was representative of Arab-Islamic identity, which he did by building the House of Wisdom, where ancient texts were translated from their original language, such as Greek, to Arabic", and the original author had just made the simple and common mistake of not writing totally clearly. However, the issue remains of the building of a library being presented as if it has to do with the city's location. Further, according to the House of Wisdom's Wikipedia page (again, I'm not an expert), that was also "modeled after the Sassanian Imperial Library", so maybe that too was meant by the original author to be presented as part of how Mansur tried to highlight their inheritance of the Persian tradition.

So that section very much confuses me. It seems there's some valuable info in there (it seems to be about why the Abbasid caliphate felt the need to portray themselves as inheriting both an Arab-Islamic and a Persian tradition, and about how they did this), but very poorly presented and organised (e.g., it wasn't clearly delineated what was their attempt to highlight their Arab-Islamic inheritance and what was their attempt to highlight their Persian inheritance), and unfortunately I don't have the knowledge necessary to sort that out.

So hopefully someone else can come in and fix these issues, because I think they're substantial problems (potentially effectively accuracy problems, certainly at least clarity problems), but that the two parts of this article I've highlighted are still quite close to accurately and clearly conveying interesting and important info.

Thanks, and sorry for the extreme long-windedness BreakfastJr (talk) 07:58, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Baghdad. 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:

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

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:19, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Some problems with map 'The Round city of Baghdad between 767 and 912 AD.'[edit]

This figure was created in 1883, by one William Muir who has his own wiki. There its says: ′Sir William Muir, KCSI (27 April 1819 – 11 July 1905) was a Scottish Orientalist, scholar of Islam, and colonial administrator... Among 20th century scholars, W. M. Watt (1961) described Muir's Life as following "in detail the standard Muslim accounts, though not uncritically"′. However, modern research shows these early 'standard accounts' to be completely unreliable, including the map; all of the history of early islam was written centuries after the purported events [1]. Muir's map is his own, with distances measured in miles rather than early Arab distance units. Where is the earliest map created by the (early) Arabs themselves?? And if there is one, why didn't Muir use it?

Most of the 1 million inhabitants must have been living outside the 2 km wide Round City, which cannot have housed more than a few thousand people; how can you cram 1 million people and ′many parks, gardens, villas, and promenades′ (article) in a space with a diameter of 2 km?? So you need suburbs which are indeed depicted in Muir's map. But why would leave a million people exposed to potential enemies, with no (massive) wall to protect them? What is the point of huge walls ′... about 44 m thick at the base and about 12 m thick at the top... 30 m high...surrounded by another wall with a thickness of 50 m.′ (article) to protect just a few thousand people?

Things are even more complicated because modern archeology hasn't found a single trace [2] of the old Baghdad or its massive walls - no ′coins, weights, and other official usage′ as the article claims. During centuries, millions must have travelled to and from Baghdad: visitors, merchants, armies. They must have left countless artifacts in the soil around Baghdad - nothing has been found. Try searching with strings like Baghdad excavations.

To cut a long story short: the map is fake, just as the mythical Baghdad of the Abbasid caliphs.

[1] Hugh Kennedy, The Great Arab Conquests (2007)

pp. 2 - 22:

′We have almost no perfectly contemporary records or descriptions of the Muslim conquests. All the accounts passed down to us, have gone through several stages of editing and revision, and the addition of new and sometimes spurious information (...) The narratives of the early Muslim conquests are replete with confusion and improbability, and are often impossible to accept at face value (...) In the form in which they have come down to us, these accounts were editied in the ninth and early tenth centuries; that is between 150 and 250 years after the events (...) Furthermore, there are some examples in which later versions of the story seem to have access to more names than earlier ones do. This is deeply suspicious for modern historical sensibilities. The anecdotes seem to grow details as they are handed on from one generation to the next (...) Perhaps even more exasperating for the modern historian is the vagueness about chronology.′

[2] Hugh Kennedy, The Prophet and the Age of the Caliphates: The Islamic Near East from the 6th to the 11th Century (2004), p. 377. --Gerard1453 (talk) 19:25, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Low quality of References[edit]

The list of references to the early history of Baghdad does not feature quality sources. To give some examples, in the article, section History/Foundation, it says ′They chose a site north of the Sassanid capital of Ctesiphon (and also just north of where ancient Babylon had once stood), and on 30 July 762[28] the caliph Al-Mansur commissioned the construction of the city.′. For further reading, one is referred to Corzine, Phyllis (2005), The Islamic Empire, Thomson Gale. pp. 68–69. But the only thing that I can find by way of biography, is that he is the author of books for ... young adults. He seems to be an amateur, lacking any suitable qualifications.

Another example is in the section Etymology, where for the term Middle Persion, one is referred to, among others, the article Baghdad in Islamic History, http://Islam.about.com, 15 July 2013, updated March 29, 2017, retrieved July 22, 2017. The author is one ′Huda′ who turns about to be a convert to islam, now living in the Middle East. She hasn't any qualifications whatsoever and cannot be expected to be objective.

I suggest, for literature and references, to stick to scholars, specializing in the relevant field, with a healthy respect for archeological field work, that is, making sure that their ideas are at least consistent with archeological results. --Gerard1453 (talk) 17:21, 22 July 2017 (UTC)