From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Pakistan / Cities  (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Pakistani cities.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Punjab (Pakistan).
WikiProject Cities (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rawalpindi Tehsil is probably a very big denomination. We should keep both, Rawalpindi and Rawalpindi Tehsil seperate topics. This is because Rawalpindi Tehsil includes many sub-urban areas and this way the identity of Rawalpindi as a city will be destroyed. SAH

Yes, the above reasoning is right. Rawalpindi Tehsil is larger than many countries of the world ,and it will be better to keep it separate.

Yes, it will not be logical to merge Rawalpindi city and Rawilpindi Tehsil articles together. If merged, then It ll be quite difficult to get the individual information about each entities. Actually Rawalpini city and Rawalpindi Tehsil are separate entities.

Thanks Guys[edit]

As my daily edits I fix and remove adverts/useless ext links from articles and so did with this article. This revert war by anon user is only because a user was blocked for hate speech on my report. Just adding this comment to thank you guys for supporting me against vandals (specially Ragib, IP198). Gives me courage to carry on my Project Clean-up. --Webkami 16:43, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


In the article two big pictures of Rawal Dam have been given and it seems they are in Rawalpindi or district Rawalpindi. In actual it is not so. Rawal dam and lake are in Islamabad area. Some body will discuss here why these pictures are here? Earlier I have deleted a picture of Nathiagali pasted here as from Ayub Park Rawalpindi.

--Khalid Mahmood-- —Preceding comment was added at 08:47, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

The infobox has a picture without a caption. Of course, what is pictured is not Rawalpindi, so a caption is needed. Fconaway (talk) 00:33, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Is that an automobile assembly plant, a hospital, or what?Fconaway (talk) 01:20, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Okay, so why is this picture here? Fconaway (talk) 22:28, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
This image has been removed, pending identification and captioning. Fconaway (talk) 08:04, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
It is the well known AFIC University in Rawalpindi. Seems appropriate for a temporary image.
Thanks for the identification. This would not be obvious to most readers of Wikipedia, so they need a caption. Now to presenting the caption: this seems to be a generic problem. The 'Infobox City Pakistan' doesn't seem to allow an image caption. For example, the Multan article uses 'Infobox City Pakistan', and its image doesn't have a caption. Those cities which use 'Infobox settlement' such as Islamabad and Karachi do have captions. How can we correct this? Fconaway (talk) 22:19, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Good Point! I think we need to see who has constructed the Infobox and ask them to put a line of code into the inforbox so we have a photo caption. --Fast track (talk) 21:31, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Grammar and Language[edit]

The grammar and language in this article is despicable. Can someone who actually speaks English re-write this article, as opposed to a Pakistani who THINKS they can speak English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Birmingham.Information (talkcontribs) 14:16, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

City vs. District[edit]

Can someone tell me why the beginning paragraph gives the population for the city as 2.1 million, but down in the demographic section it gives the municipality a population or nearly 3.1 million? Is one counting the city and the other the district, if so, than this needs to be corrected, because this page is for the MUNICIPALITY of city, not of the district. Also, the land area and population need to be given in the infobox, too. --Criticalthinker (talk) 03:43, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

This is now years old, but it bare repeating for clarification. Population for "cities" in Pakistan either need to be given for the urban area, irrespective of union councils boundaries, or for teshils, or in rare cases the entire district. In the case of Rawalpindi, it'd seem that as if the "city" is the tehsil level, so the area and population for Rawalpindi Tehsil needs to be given in the infobox. --Criticalthinker (talk) 08:46, 17 February 2017 (UTC)


I think the term "Lakh" should be used for the amount with conversion in bracket since the norms are to use the variety of English associated with the place in question, which is Pakistani English in this case.-lTopGunl (talk) 19:44, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, TopGun, for your interesting challenge. I worried a lot on how to proceed in this case.

For example, since Pindi historically was never a temporary garrison, the general English word "cantonment" could be used without conflict with the Pakistani English special meaning of "cantonment" as a permanent military town. Since the unit of currency used in the historical section was the British Raj Rupee used throughout the Empire of India (then including what is now Pakistan) the object in question is not the same as the currency now used in Pakistan. (I did chose to use the abbreviation "Rs." of Raj India, not the Pakistani English abbreviation of "Rs" - without the dot.) Of course, 111 years of inflation and devaluations would make the two objects utterly incommensurate even if they were in the same organic line, as some might argue.

I do regret that I have not found one of the standard "shopping basket" translations of older currencies into contemporaneous values. As it stands, the article's claim of Rawapindi's preeminent size cannot be understood without rational comparisons of the Raj rupee to Pakistan's current rupee, or some other modern and well-known unit of account.

The rest of the article mostly uses American English forms of expression of numbers and precedence of units, with no other mention of the South Asian numeration in terms of lacs and crores, nor that system of numeration's grouping of numbers larger than a thousand in pairs of digits, rather than the general ISO (International Standards) preference for grouping in triplets. Thus, I chose modes of expression in keeping with Wikipedia's guide to stick with the style use in the rest of the article.

[Retaining the existing variety WP:RETAIN: "In general, disputes over which English variety to use in an article are strongly discouraged. Such debates rarely accomplish anything apart from wasting time and engendering controversy."]

Indeed, this one paragraph's content had been drawn entirely from the referenced Imperial Gazetteer of India, but with a serious mistake: Instead of translating the older numeration of a mid-height point as the decimal fraction marker, it was rendered as a hyphen with spacing. This is likely to be confusing for most readers, and as an error of transliteration, had to be changed.

In keeping with the "Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers", I did not want to "overwhelm the content of the article" with multiple conversions between lac/crore and ISO numeration, so I kept to the article's otherwise completely ISO adherence in the expression of numerals. I did choose, again I hope compliant with Wikipedia standards, to the more international and thus neutral version of numeration that uses spaces rather than commas or thin-spaces. Use of ISO preferences in this case seems to serve the Wikipedia guide of seeking commonality:

[Opportunities for commonality WP:COMMONALITY -- "Wikipedia tries to find words that are common to all varieties of English. ... Universally used terms are often preferable to less widely distributed terms ... Use a commonly understood word or phrase in preference to one that has a different meaning because of national differences ..."]

Again, TopGun, thank you for highlighting how complex can be the task of briefly summarizing a few sentences from an English document of only a century ago. GreggEdwards (talk) 03:40, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the detailed reply to this. WP:RETAIN is the reason I did not revert your edit and instead chose to discuss on 0RR. Also that would be useless contention. You are right, much of the article might not be written in the right English here. Esp. American English, has the least relation with Pakistani English unless it is computer related terminology (ie. "programme" is used normally but Pakistani programmers use the word "program" almost always). Pakistani English is mainly an evolved form of British English (which is obvious). Pakistani English will not have much clashes if we use British English to write the whole article and then make the detailed changes for Pakistani English if possible. The dot with the "Rs" is many times put (or not) in Pakistani standards too. I think that is not an English issue so no problem there. You are an aware user so I think I don't need to quote about why local English is preferred for an article or any of its other points. Many English words like "cantonment" are exactly the same as British English (though we see "Cantt." being used almost always by the Military Brats). I've seen in other articles that "Km" and "Mile" is converted on every mention.. so I think conversion will not have that effect of creating disarray. Numbering system and other typical terms are the major differences in the variations of this kind of English which could even be debated to be kept on their own notability. The 100 year ago terms are actually still contemporary (mostly) in Pakistan. Infact if you check out the stub Pakistani English, it rightly says that Pakistani English has actually preserved terms and words that are not used in current British English. The city Rawalpindi has strong ties to military (be that be British or Pakistani - which too are the same in many ways), on the other hand Pakistan uses all ISO standards as well which would have led to the over all article being this way in the first place. Now what we have to consider is that on one side almost every one who does not have a graduation degree in Rawalpindi might not know that "Hundred thousand" means Lakh (atleast not without writing down a "100" into "1000" multiplication and then exclaiming, "Oh, this is 'lakh'!") and on other it might be confusing for others. Although this last term is just an insight for you and not a sourced claim (as yet) to be put in the article. Conversion here seems to be the best way. May be it would be better to keep it your way so as not to create confusion and later give it a rewrite to conform with Pakistani English? Regards. --lTopGunl (talk) 10:27, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Map image breaches policy & has been removed[edit]

There is currently a deletion discussion taking place at Commons regarding File:Map on Dialects Of Punjabi Language.jpg, which can be viewed here. Regardless of whether the map image is deleted at Commons, I think that it needs to be removed from all English Wikipedia articles because it breaches our synthesis policy. The image creator has provided a long list of sources in the deletion discussion and it is evident from those that none contain all of the information shown in the image, nor is it a simple task to work out which bits of information were gleaned from which source(s). We simply do not permit people to aggregate information in this way. It should also be noted that the chances are very high that the various sources did not even adopt the same methodology in compiling their data, which makes the analysis of the creator even more suspect.

I have removed the image because the Commons discussion may end up as something other than "delete" and yet the thing is still invalid on English Wikipedia. - Sitush (talk) 19:07, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Map was deleted on two reasons. 1... Commons deletion discussion but now Deletion request by Sitush has been rejected on Wikimedia Commons. 2... Sitush has a self perception that map is synthesis, which is actually not because it is based on latest research of 2007 in the Publication named 'The Indo-Aryan Languages' by George Cardona and Dhanesh Jain. So I am re inserting it. Unless Sitush prove it again as a synthesis and refer me the areas of map being synthesized also mentioning the different publications along with page numbers where from in his kind opinion I have synthesized the map.Maria0333 (talk) 08:18, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Etymology of Rawalapindi: Need more information on the origin of this name. Who is this Raja Pindi? Pindi means village and Rawal is a title used by Hindu Rajputs of India. The city owes its name to Bappa Rawal, a Hindu Rajput of India's northwest part - not to some fictional Raja Pindi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gripped soul (talkcontribs) 15:22, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rawalpindi. 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) 08:16, 10 December 2017 (UTC)