Talk:Pakistan

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Pakistan article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22: 90 days

view · edit

Frequently asked questions

Many of these questions arise frequently on the talk page regarding Pakistan.

To view an explanation to the answer, click the [show] link to the right of the question.

Q1: Can I add/remove an image? or Why was my image removed?

A1: Yes, you can add and remove images but you might want to take some points into consideration before doing that. The images were carefully chosen in balance to represent the text in a neutral way from all parts of the country. All images have also been thoroughly checked for their copy right licenses while some are added to a switch code so that each time the server cache is refreshed, the image changes automatically to the next one listed in the code. Image removals and replacements are in most cases likely to be reverted due to such reasons. Please consider starting a section regarding the image on the article talk page and discuss how it should be added so as to get a consensus. See also Talk:Pakistan/Archive 13#Positioning, adding & removing images.

Q2: Can I add --- and --- details? or Why was my text removed?

A2: All text in Wikipedia has to be verifiable through reliable sources. Any content that does is not published in an independent reliable source can be removed. This article is specifically maintaining a much higher standard after it has been worked on in detail in such terms to keep it from becoming an original research. Also note that while your additions are notable they still might be reverted per WP:WEIGHT. WP:UNDUE and WP:NPOV. In case of such reverts, please use the talk page to discuss the content Also search or take a look through the archives listed on the talk page to see if that has been previously discussed to prevent a discussion going in circles over time.

Q3: Why no subsection for --- or ---?

A3: Please see WP:WEIGHT and WP:UNDUE. Everything related to Pakistan can not have a separate section as it would be undue to give it a mention at length. However, most related topics' main article is linked to in the article and the topic covered per its due weight. The main country article has much broader scope about the country rather than specific issues which might probably be occurring at a specific point of time of the country's history or a small part of it. If you still think some thing can be added to further improve the article or that subsections can be further improved, please start a discussion at the talk page with your proposal.

Q4: The map of Pakistan is incorrect!

A4: The dark green area shows the total area constituting Pakistan while the area shaded in light green denotes Jammu and Kashmir – territory that is claimed, but not administered, by Pakistan. This geographic detail is per neutral point of view and does not adhere to the Pakistani, Indian or any other government's descriptions of territory.

Q5: Terrorism/Kashmir/any other controversial topic should be mentioned more!

A5: Such topics are already covered in the article in terms of their actual issues or effects on the country. If you think any detail is missing, use the talk page to discuss that. Bluntly adding such details to the main country article is generally considered inappropriate.

This article is written in Pakistani English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, travelled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Pakistan is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 29, 2006.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 10, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
March 11, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
March 25, 2006	Featured article candidate	Promoted
April 22, 2009	Featured article review	Demoted
January 24, 2010	Peer review	Reviewed
March 29, 2010	Good article nominee	Not listed
January 14, 2012	Peer review	Reviewed
March 25, 2012	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
March 6, 2017	Good article nominee	Not listed
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on August 14, 2004, March 23, 2005, August 14, 2005, March 23, 2006, August 14, 2006, March 23, 2007, August 14, 2007, August 14, 2008, and February 5, 2011.
Current status: Former featured article

Pakistan Top‑importance

	Pakistan portal 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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

South Asia High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Asia, which aims to improve the quality and status of all South Asia-related articles. For more information, please visit the Project page.South AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject South AsiaTemplate:WikiProject South AsiaSouth Asia articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Asia High‑importance

	Asia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Asia 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.AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject AsiaTemplate:WikiProject AsiaAsia articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Countries

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries 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.CountriesWikipedia:WikiProject CountriesTemplate:WikiProject Countriescountry articles

WikiProject Countries to-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Check out the article alerts; see if anything catches your fancy.
Cleanup : clean-up listing for Countries
Stubs : de-stub articles in Category:Stubs by region.
Other : add {{WPCountries}} to talk pages of related articles, and assess.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Corinne, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 28 April 2017.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Previous copyedits:
/
	This article was copy edited by Stfg on 22 April 2012.
	This article was copy edited by Bejinhan on 8 July 2010.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 October 2023[edit]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

pakistan is also known for its cricket. people call our country as bhikaristan. mentioning bhikaristan in Wikipedia would be helpfull. i don't know how to attach the sources here TheCuteSporty (talk) 09:23, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, if you can just provide the link to the source (or the name of it if it isn't online), I can format it for you. Liu1126 (talk) 09:47, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bhikari / Bhikaristan is an abusive and islamophobic slur used by hindu nationalists against muslims and Pakistanis Muhammad Mahd (talk) 18:05, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

so you want your country to be known as land of beggars ? Bruh Abraca21 (talk) 14:39, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Closed request pending response from TheCuteSporty. Actualcpscm^{scrutinize, talk} 17:44, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 January 2024[edit]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the "Islamic Conquest" section, paragraph 2: change Lahore, Peshawar to Lahore, Peshawar Jblkby5594 (talk) 06:15, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article is not too long[edit]

The article has the right length When the child has been good (talk) 18:53, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Imran Khan[edit]

In the Pakistani elections, Imran khan, has won he is prime minister it needs changes. Micheal Paleologo-Oriundi (talk) 10:52, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

only Pakistan is a change in one person an that's of person mulana fazal rehman shb and saad shb 39.43.210.47 (talk) 16:23, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Role of Islam section[edit]

I read the Role of Islam section. I found that the most of the informations are political and some information is also about the government.So in my opinion, If the section is merged with the Government and politics section it will make more sense. Cactinites (talk) 15:36, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The section is appropriately positioned. I believe it doesn't belong under Government and politics because it doesn't delve into the operations of the government or the role of Islam solely within the government and politics. Instead, it begins with the establishment of the country and then proceeds to discuss the Objectives Resolution. This page is monitored by approximately 2,000 editors, with over 5,000 editors having already contributed to it. I would prefer to have more editors express their support for the change before proceeding with it. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 21:33, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Unparalleled" mass migration and loss of life[edit]

"...after the Partition of the British Indian Empire, which awarded separate statehood to its Muslim-majority regions and was accompanied by an unparalleled mass migration and loss of life." The cited source gives a range upwards of a million deaths, which seems to be generally agreed upon, as well as a number of total migrants. Why not include the numbers here?

Also "unparalleled" is not qualified. In what sense? Certainly though this is arguably the largest mass migration in history, there have been other mass displacements of similar magnitude. Even the cited article qualifies with "...in the history of South Asia."

Further, the way it's written may imply that the loss of life is unparalleled which is factually untrue.

"Unprecedented" would be more appropriate, and is, in fact, how most scholarly articles describe it, as well as the Partition of India page. "... an unprecedented mass migration of... and the loss of life estimated to be in the range of..." is how I'd purpose to rewrite this. Jimmisimp (talk) 14:59, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Unprecedented" would be the correct term as per the main article. Capitals00 (talk) 09:12, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image[edit]

@SheriffIsInTown: Can you describe why Syed Ahmed's photo is needed? While Pakistan's official narrative lends him some credit for the creation of Pakistan, he does not seem to have played any role in the creation of Pakistan itself. The two-nation theory promoted by Jinnah also does not resemble Syed. Capitals00 (talk) 15:48, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

His involvement is noted in that segment. While he may not have directly contributed to the establishment of Pakistan, in the context of modern Indian history, he is often regarded as the precursor to its creation, which ultimately materialized with Jinnah. Consequently, the section adequately showcases two images, one symbolizing the inception and the other marking the culmination of this historical trajectory. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 16:06, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then I am open to changing caption.

"Sir Syed Ahmed Khān, was a major personality shaping both, the Muslim identity and the Urdu language."[1]
"Slowly a national Muslim identity emerged, championed by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan (1817-98)."[2]
"Sir Syed urged the need to preserve a separate Muslim identity, both culturally and politcally and feared a political alliance with the Hindus."[3]

This is how he is often described as. Are you okay with changing the current caption to "Sir Syed Khhan (1817-1898) shaped the Muslim identity in South Asia."? Capitals00 (talk) 16:45, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are numerous sources out there which attribute him as the progenitor of the two-nation theory, which ultimately laid the foundation for the Pakistan movement. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 21:17, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HM[edit]

@SheriffIsInTown: Why you had removed mention of Hindu Mahasabha with edit summary "Hindu Mahasba's two nation theory has nothing to do with creation of Pakistan"?[4] This is one source which describes how Hindu Mahasbha and Savarkar spread the two-nation theory years before Muslim League supported it. Capitals00 (talk) 17:14, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that Hindu Mahasabha and Savarkar espoused the two-nation theory before the Muslim League does not necessarily imply that their theory directly led to the creation of Pakistan. The two-nation theories proposed by Hindu Mahasabha and Muslim League were distinct and unrelated, with Hindu Mahasabha's theory having no significant impact on the creation of Pakistan. Additionally, I disagree with your removal of the sole mention of Sir Syed in the article. It appears that you are attempting to alter history by omitting Sir Syed's role and instead emphasizing the role of Hindu Mahasabha. Just because we come across new information doesn't mean we should revise established consensus across all pages. I can only imagine what your next suggestion might be – removing Sir Syed's picture and adding Savarkar's picture next to Jinnah. Such an idea would be absurd. History has already been documented, and there is no need to rewrite it. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 17:29, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is not particularly about creation of Pakistan but Pakistan itself. If two-nation theory of Hindu Mahasabha did not concern Pakistan then why it has been mentioned in the same context as the two-nation theory by Muslim League? As for the image of Syed Ahmed Khan, the discussion is already above. Capitals00 (talk) 17:49, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That could be just considered WP:FRINGE. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 17:52, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These sources cannot be termed as "fringe":

Bombwall, K.R. (1967). The Foundations of Indian Federalism. Asia Publishing House. p. 228. It was Savarkar , and not Jinnah , who first propounded the two - nation theory . In his presidential address at the Ahmedabad ( 1937 )...
Habib, Irfan (2003). History in the New NCERT Text Books for Class VI, IX, and XI: --a Report and an Index of Errors. Executive Committee, Indian History Congress. p. 122. Savarkar, the Hindu Mahasabha leader, had propagated the two-nation theory in 1937 much before Jinnah
Singh, A.; Iyer, N.; Gairola, R.K.; Akhtar, N.; Baishya, A.R.; Bhavnani, N.; Chattha, I.; Ghosh, A.; Haq, K.; Haque, R. (2016). Revisiting India's Partition: New Essays on Memory, Culture, and Politics. Lexington Books. p. 29. ISBN 978-1-4985-3105-4.
Needham, A.D.; Rajan, R.S. (2007). The Crisis of Secularism in India. Online access with subscription: Duke University Press. Duke University Press. p. 371. ISBN 978-0-8223-3846-8.
Chandra, B. (2004). Communalism: A Primer. Anamika. p. 79. ISBN 978-81-7975-045-2.

Capitals00 (talk) 18:06, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not contesting Savarkar proposing two-nation theory before Jinnah, I am contesting Savarkar and his theory's relationship with creation of Pakistan. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 19:07, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But if Savarkar is irrelevant here, as you say, then these sources would have never mentioned that Savarkar with his two-nation theory predated Jinnah's two nation theory. They are making the mention because they find the relation with Jinnah's two nation theory. Capitals00 (talk) 20:03, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe, you can add that content to Two-nation theory which is one of the main articles for that section, instead of insisting to add to this article which is already a whopping 15,000 words. This article is supposed to have only a summary anyway. You don’t have to add what you learned to multiple articles. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 17:32, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But why do you have to make blanket reverts for that over very few sourced sentences? If you want to reduce article size then start from trimming the whole Pakistan#Demographics section which is mostly unnecessary. Srijanx22 (talk) 18:05, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many editors have been engaging in a cycle of reversions, indicating a lack of agreement on these additions. It wasn't solely my actions, as at least two other editors supported my stance through their reversions. If there's no agreement, there's simply no agreement. Why persist with these additions without consensus? Capitals00 introduced this content, but it faced opposition through subsequent reversions by several other editors. We can either continue this cycle of reversions or adhere to the consensus-building process before making such additions. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 18:24, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They provided no reason to revert. Their reason to revert reads nothing more than blocking sincere content in the name "go get consensus". It should be completely ignored. The article needs trimming, I don't deny but the history section does not need it. Capitals00 (talk) 01:17, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simply suggesting that a two-nation theory predates Jinnah's theory does not inherently imply a direct correlation between them. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 19:37, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Two-nation theory has an explicit meaning and there are enough reliable sources that made it sure to mention that it was Hindu Mahasabha who promoted it before Muslim League. Are you okay with changing "Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, to advocate the two-nation theory" to "Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, to advocate the two-nation theory which was already being advocated by the Hindu Mahasabha"? Capitals00 (talk) 01:22, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not arguing against the existence of Savarkar's two-nations theory. My contention lies in its relevance to the creation of Pakistan. Even if Savarkar proposed his theory before or concurrently with Jinnah, why should it merit a mention in Pakistan's country article? The efforts and struggles of Jinnah and other leaders in the Pakistan Movement are evident in materializing the theory into Pakistan. However, Savarkar's role at that time is not visible; he wasn't actively involved in realizing his theory into a tangible form like Pakistan. While he may have had a theory and may have shared it with a few individuals, his presence and his theory fade into the background compared to Jinnah and his theory, which led to the actual establishment of Pakistan. Savarkar and his theory remain obscure in history, perhaps why there's an attempt to highlight it by you. Nevertheless, having a theory without any active effort towards its realization holds little significance compared to a theory that was successfully materialized. Theories lacking in efforts for realization often remain confined to books, gathering dust. I don't believe it's necessary to mention Savarkar in the Pakistan article since he played no role in its creation; he's not considered a founder of any nation, as that title is reserved for those who actively struggled to materialize their visions, which Savarkar did not, aside from mentioning his theory in a few speeches. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 05:10, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These reliable sources mention Hindu Mahasabha to have already promoted two-nation theory obviously because Muslim League was not doing something surprising but something which was already circulating around. This is why I proposed a small change from "Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, to advocate the two-nation theory" to "Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, to advocate the two-nation theory which was already being advocated by the Hindu Mahasabha". Capitals00 (talk) 16:56, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

President[edit]

For the moment, it is still Alvi, as Zardari hasn't been sworn yet - should be changed until that happens. 2A02:810D:1500:32EC:19DC:C53D:6C92:859F (talk) 18:17, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 March 2024[edit]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the demographics section there's a part which says indian army raped kashmiri women, meanwhile there's enough substantial evidence to show Bengalis esp Hindus being raped by Pakistani army routinely in the 1970s Abraca21 (talk) 14:39, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done No alteration concerning contentious material can be implemented against a prior consensus without a new consensus being reached. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 15:52, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 March 2024[edit]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Edit the Human Development Index of Pakistan Nhnnguyeneee (talk) 22:54, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done Updated with 2023/2024 report. Please provide your own sources in future requests. Liu1126 (talk) 23:39, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 March 2024[edit]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

2601:182:501:72C0:1F8:42A0:4C4C:C40E (talk) 01:49, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Countries that Pakistan doesn’t recognize |1|| | style="text-align:left"| Armenia |- |2|| (1) | style="text-align:left"| Israel |- |3|| | {{left} India

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 09:01, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article size[edit]

I will be working on reducing the readable prose size of this article. The initial goal will be to reduce as much size by just language adjustment without changing the meaning and context of the content. There will not be any whole sale removal in initial stage. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 01:55, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright waiting on that. Nobody told me about the language adjustment part. However I did move the military history portion from here to Pakistan Armed Force and now there is duplication. I suggest we at least remove that. Also law enforcement section was fixed. So I reverted back to that portion. We can work from there. Wikibear47 (talk) 02:03, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The size is now a hair below 15,000 words (14,966 to be exact, by independent count; the tools here do a *terrible* job of counting) and WP:SIZESPLIT is neither policy, nor guideline. This is a top-level, parent article in summary style; pretty much everything that could be shifted into child articles has been shifted. Thank you for your changes; the article is fine, now; please stop removing content (other than true duplication, and if you can move excess content from long subsections here to child articles, I have no objection). For further cuts not of those types, please achieve consensus here first. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 23:06, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]