Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:14, 5 January 2007

How do you spell Rawalpindi in Urdu? Thanks! Vpendse 07:00, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

راولپنڈی --Bhola 04:20, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

This article is a joke

Their is mention of an ancient Pakistan? Dravidians coming from Iran? Who made this profile? 71.107.54.199 09:35, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Made major changes to article

Hello folks. I made major changes to the article by largely keeping much of the previous information and then expanding it and adding pictures as well. If there are any suggestions and comments I'd be glad to hear them. Thanks. Tombseye 10:24, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Taxila Image in Punjab (Pakistan)

I think that the Taxila image (Taxila Buddha.jpg) would be more appropriate in Punjab region page rather than Punjab (Pakistan) page. I have removed that image from Punjab (Pakistan) page.

Siddiqui 22:16, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

You've mentioned what you want to do, but haven't included the rationale for your decision. Why do you think the photo is not relevant to the Pakistan Punjab page?

Just a side note: When you revert changes, please don't revert constructive edits in between. I had resized all the images on the page so they were consistent. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 22:31, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

The Taxila statue is most relevant to Punjab region page as it is relevant to whole of Punjab than just to Western Punjab. The East and West Punjab should emphasize their own history and Punjab region should have their common history.

Siddiqui 15:14, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

By that reckoning, why not delete all history in the West/East Punjab articles that is related to pre-Partition? Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 15:42, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and of course, we'd have to remove the Badshahi Masjid picture too then in that case as that was part of pre-Partition history. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 15:45, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Changed infobox

There's no point having an infobox if only one article uses it - each province plus Islamabad had their own infobox. So I've replaced the obsolete Template:Punjab-infobox with a generic one for all provinces and territories. Green Giant 01:05, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Middle Eastern influence prior to Islam?

I think it is erroneous to say there was middle eastern influence in the Panjab prior to the coming of Islam. Prior to Islam, the culture of the region was almost wholly South Asian in nature. At most there was indeed significant Central Asian influence from the Sakas, Kushans, Huns and Parthians, as well as some Greek influence via the Indo-Greek kingdom but there was no real Middle Eastern influence prior to Islam. The Persians invaded sure but they did not significantly impose Persian culture on the locals. Hindu/Buddhist culture stayed the norm and the Persians pretty much just ruled. Middle Eastern influence did come with the arrival of Islam but even that was second hand influence, coming to them via the Turks/Afghans who got it from the Arabs a few centuries prior. Apart from Islam, Panjab is very much a South Asian region with significant Central Asian influence, due to it's proximity. At least this is the impression I have from it's history and the culture as I saw it. Someone correct me if I'm wrong though? - — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.221.1.97 (talk • contribs)

Sikh History section

Someone has inflated this section considerably. I don't have time to fix it now, but hopefully will do so soon. If not, I'm posting this here to see if anyone else wants to do it :) Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 13:20, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Sukh I've compacted the section to a appropriate size.--Sikh scholar 06:50, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey! That's much better, although I still feel it is too long. It has too much weight compared to say the section on the Mughals. It should probably be about a paragraph if possible. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 22:26, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

ANd make the devangari is there!--D-Boy 04:26, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

' == ''''''hey am dj zeus my name is ab . and i love pakistan . am in doha qater . ''Italic text'''''''' =='

Revision By Siddiqui as of 22:18, 1 January 2007

(edit) (undo) Removing unnecessary categories added by Intothefire

Siddiqui the categories are not unnecessary .The history of the peoples of subcontinent are a rich tapestry of a million strands . The history of people of Arabic extraction from the state of UP in India and Bareily is as factual as the history of Punjabi Hindus and Sikhs from the undivided Punjab before 1947 . The history of the Punjab is a shared legacy of various religious ,social , ethnic and even linguistic groups .This includes Hindus , Sikhs , Buddhist , Jains , Christians , as well as ethnically diverse people . This also includes the ethnically diverse people of the Punjab now settled in two different countries .The history of the India Punjab is similarly the combined legacy of people from different faiths.

Therefore please do not remove categories added .Intothefire 07:08, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

The categories that you added were not appropriate to the subject of the article. "Punjab" is not a surname, and neither is it the name of a caste. References to those things should occur in the article itself, in their proper contexts. Then the articles they link to will have the appropriate categories. Otherwise the article will end up with dozens of categories for anything remotely connected to Punjab. ... discospinster _talk 13:41, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Forced Migrations

There wer million of Hindus and Sitks that migrated from West Punjab teo East Punjab while millions of Muslims migrated to West Punjab. Just adding info about Hindu and Sikh refugees while ignoring Muslim refugees is unacceptable. There were a million people killed of three faiths in brutal manner. Just naming victims of one relgion while ignoring others is npt neutral point of view. There are millions of Pakistani Punjabis that were forced leave East Punjab in 1947. Indian contributors completely ignore thier miseries. All those suffered were victims regardless of faith. Siddiqui 03:14, 5 January 2007 (UTC)