Talk:Mirpur, Azad Kashmir

Untitled

Cleanup is badly needed - especially on the surroundings section. I am not very experienced in this so I have flagged it so that someone can do a good job. The POV and general unprofessional nature of the article make it read more of a advertisement for certain areas rather than a encyclopaedia entry. 87.194.26.229 03:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I was forced to revert the removal of the cleanup and advertisement tag - no reason was given by the user for removal and the article is still in the same state as before 87.194.26.229 21:07, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I am planning to do a complete rewrite of this article about Mirpur, It will include history, culture and language aspects with proper references. I expect to do this before mid May 2007.

It would be nice if there were some pictures to be seen. I'm from England but my parents were born and brought up in Pakistan and it would be nice to see images of their home land.

I'm sure you'll find these photos most interesting,[1] enjoy! 82.47.146.235 16:56, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Please note the Mirour is not officiially twinned or classed as a 'Sister City' with any location in the UK. Friendship status has been bestwoed on the other hand so unless conclusive proof can be provided any thing stating this will be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taswar123 (talk • contribs) 13:05, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Mirpur Development Authority

The website link at the bottom of the infobox is no longer working. Does any local area user know if the MDA has closed down, or is it just that their system is down? Richard Harvey (talk) 23:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Use of POK: The use of POK is very biased and is an Indian term for Pakistan administered Kashmir. Correct word is Azad Kashmir or to be politicaly neutral "Pakistan Administered Kashmir" should be used. Wiki articles should be neutral and not be biased. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ditaksar (talk • contribs) 00:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

British Pakistanis

Almost everyone in Mirpur knows somebody living in England. This article really should mention something about the huge number of Mirpuri people that form part of the British Pakistani community. I would have added something myself but the article is locked by Administrators. If somebody does get the chance to edit, the following BBC link might be useful - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6178092.stm - Thanks Sansonic (talk) 19:40, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Its now been returned to semi-protection so you should be able to edit it yourself :).

PS you are able to challenge protections on WP:RUP -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 15:33, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I will edit the article soon Sansonic (talk) 17:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Sister Cities

The reason I have deleted some of the twinned cities is because most of them were wrong. I referenced all the ones i could find however manchester is twinned with faisalabad not mirpur and maidenhead, luton, leeds, nottingham, newcastle, oldham and slough are not twinned with mirpur. if u can prove that they are and reference it go right ahead but i've done a lot of searching for them but they simply are not twinned with mirpur Hrh80 (talk) 23:48, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Ownership disputed

Both India and Pakistan want this land; Pakistan has controlled it for a long time. I just reverted some user's edits changing this from Pakistani land to Indian. Anyone wanting to change the article in this way ought to state their reasoning on this board. Blue Rasberry 00:46, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Interwiki

{{editsemiprotected}}

Could an interwiki for मीर पोर be added?

Done, thanks. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:06, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 86.181.72.156, 18 August 2010

{{editsemiprotected}}

86.181.72.156 (talk) 15:52, 18 August 2010 (UTC) Raja Munshi Khan Lamberdar of village Chawala near Tahsil Charhoi was famous elder of the District Mirpur, He died in 1942.

Not done: Welcome. Please provide a reliable source for this information and to establish notability. Thanks. Celestra (talk) 00:18, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

History of Mirpur, Ethnic origin of Mirpur founder

There have been continued attempts by someone editing and changing the founder of Mirpur from Gakhar to Sayyid tribe.

Please find the URL for page 115 of Imperial Gazetteer of India Provincial Series: Kashmir and Jammu By Walter Roper Lawrence 1909, where the ethnic origin of Mirpur founders is provided as Gakhars. Any attempts to falsify history should not be allowed.

http://books.google.ca/books?id=TvkpSbmwrf8C&pg=PA115&dq=mirpur&hl=en&ei=QGvQTZWqEMnq0QGit5T0DQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=mirpur&f=false —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.12.40.129 (talk) 00:26, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Coordinate error

The following coordinate fixes are needed for mirpur azad kashmir

Latitude Longitude 33.15110 73.73602

—Ditaksar (talk) 22:16, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done Sumanch (talk) 14:08, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mirpur, Azad Kashmir. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.khalidhasan.net/2007/03/16/mirpur-1947-%E2%80%93-the-untold-story
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://udayindia.org/content_08may2010/statescan.html

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:35, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 February 2018

Daqkssmak (talk) 07:58, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

• Dr. A. Q. Khan School System Mirpur Azad Kashmir

 Not done: Daqkssmak, schools are only listed if they have an existing Wikipedia article. If you are affiliated with this school system, please about our conflict of interest guidelines. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 22:09, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Surroundings

Can anyone give a justification for having a 'Surroundings' section in the current format? There is nothing of the sort suggested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/Settlements: Article structure along those lines. Perhaps a Geography section, which could include some text on the surroundings and the content from Climate, could be added in due course. Meanwhile 'Surroundings' might best be deleted as being off topic.SovalValtos (talk) 20:13, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Agreed - as often happens, some editors appear confused about the scope of the article - it is about Mirpur City - Mirpur District is a separate article, which should deal with the "surroundings" - Arjayay (talk) 09:30, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Treaties on Kashmir

Various scholars have written on the Instrument of Accession (Jammu and Kashmir), The Treaty of Lahore (9 March 1846) and the Treaty of Amritsar (16 March 1846). But very little of that text is on wikipedia.

Maharaja gulab Singh originally worked for the Sikh Empire. But then betrayed the Sikh empire by siding with the East India Company in the Anglo-Sikh War. His name is mentioned in the treaty of Lahore too. He collected Taxes for the East India Company and the money was then given by him to the East India Company.

The Treaty of Lahore (9 March 1846) and the Treaty of Amritsar (16 March 1846) lapsed under Article 7 of the Independence Act 1947. The Act was passed by the British Parliament on July 18, 1947 to assent to the creation of the independent states of India and Pakistan. The aforementioned Article 7 provides that, with the lapse of His Majesty’s suzerainty over the Indian states, all treaties, agreements, obligations, grants, usages and sufferance’s will lapse.

The 7 year old Maharaja Duleep Singh Bahadur (Sikh) was under the control of the East India company when he sign The Treaty of Lahore on 9 March 1846 which gave Jammu and Kashmir and its people to the East India Company.

Under the British legal system and international law a treaty signed by the 7 year old Maharaja Duleep Singh Bahadur and under duress is not valid. (The International Court of Justice has stated that there "can be little doubt, as is implied in the Charter of the United Nations and recognized in Article 52 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, that under contemporary international law an agreement concluded under the threat or use of force is void.)

We may need to add a section on the impact on the removal of Article 370 of the Indian constitution on The Instrument of Accession too. None of this text is on there.

Various scholars have written on these treaties, for example Alistair Lamb disputed the validity of the Instrument of Accession in his paper Myth of Indian Claim to JAMMU & KASHMIR –– A REAPPRAISAL'

Where he writes "While the date, and perhaps even the fact, of the accession to India of the State of Jammu & Kashmir in late October 1947 can be questioned, there is no dispute at that time any such accession was presented to the world at large as conditional and provisional. It was not communicated to Pakistan at the outset of the overt Indian intervention in the State of Jammu & Kashmir, nor was it presented in facsimile to the United Nations in early 1948 as part of the initial Indian reference to the Security Council. The 1948 White Paper in which the Government of India set out its formal case in respect to the State of Jammu & Kashmir, does not contain the Instrument of Accession as claimed to have been signed by the Maharajah: instead, it reproduces an unsigned form of Accession such as, it is implied, the Maharajah might have signed. To date no satisfactory original of this Instrument as signed by the Maharajah has been produced: though a highly suspect version, complete with the false date 26 October 1947, has been circulated by the Indian side since the 1960s. On the present evidence it is by no means clear that the Maharaja ever did sign an Instrument of Accession.

Indian troops actually began overtly to intervene in the State’s affairs on the morning of 27 October 1947

It is now absolutely clear that the two documents (a) the Instrument of Accession, and (c) the letter to Lord Mountbatten, could not possibly have been signed by the Maharajah of Jammu & Kashmir on 26 October 1947. The earliest possible time and date for their signature would have to be the afternoon of 27 October 1947. During 26 October 1947 the Maharajah of Jammu & Kashmir was travelling by road from Srinagar to Jammu. (The Kashmir State Army divisions and the Kashmiri people had already turned on him and he was on the run and had no authority in the state). His new Prime Minister, M.C. Mahajan, who was negotiating with the Government of India, and the senior Indian official concerned in State matters, V.P. Menon, were still in New Delhi where they remained overnight, and where their presence was noted by many observers. There was no communication of any sort between New Delhi and the travelling Maharajah. Menon and Mahajan set out by air from New Delhi to Jammu at about 10.00 a.m. on 27 October; and the Maharajah learned from them for the first time the result of his Prime Minister’s negotiations in New Delhi in the early afternoon of that day. The key point, of course, as has already been noted above, is that it is now obvious that these documents could only have been signed after the overt Indian intervention in the State of Jammu & Kashmir on 27 October 1947. When the Indian troops arrived at Srinagar air field, that State was still independent. Any agreements favourable to India signed after such intervention cannot escape the charge of having been produced under duress. (The International Court of Justice has stated that there "can be little doubt, as is implied in the Charter of the United Nations and recognized in Article 52 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, that under contemporary international law an agreement concluded under the threat or use of force is void.)"

Additionally Maharaja was on the run. The prevailing international practice on the recognition of state governments is based on the following three factors: first, the government’s actual control of the territory; second, the government’s enjoyment of the support and obedience of the majority of the population; third, the government’s ability to stake the claim that it has a reasonable expectation of staying in power. The situation on the ground demonstrates that the Maharaja was not in control of the state of Jammu and Kashmir and was fleeing for his life and almost all of Kashmir was under the control of the Kashmiri people and the Kashmiri Army that had rebelled against him. His own troops had turned on him. With regard to the Maharaja’s control over the local population, it is clear that he enjoyed no such control or support. The people of Kashmir had been sold by the East India Company and he charged them high taxes thetefore the Kashmir Muslims, Hindus Pandits and Buddhists hated him. Furthermore, the state’s armed forces were in total disarray after most of the men turned against him and he was running for his life. Finally, it is highly doubtful that the Maharaja could claim that his government had a reasonable chance of staying in power without Indian military intervention. This assumption is substantiated by the Maharaja’s letters.

Many of these treaties apply to Jammu and Kashmir. The Kashmir conflict is already on Wikipedia. It is internationally recognized as a disputed territory under various United United Nations resolutions that are already listed on Wikipedia Nations Security Council Resolution 47, Nations Security Council Resolution 39,mediation of the Kashmir dispute, Nations Commission for India and Pakistan. There is a lot of documentation on Jammu and Kashmir in the UN archives already. If you look at the page Kashmir conflict, it already contains sections on the "Indian view", "Pakistani view", "Chinese view", "Kashmiri views". May be we could do something like that with these treaty pages. The Treaty of Lahore was signed in 9 March 1846 and the Treaty of Amritsar 16 March 1846. They predate the creation of both modern day India and Pakistan. The Treaty of Lahore was signed between the Sikh Empire and the British government. It is an international treaty and comes under international law. Johnleeds1 (talk) 11:36, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Johnleeds1 what specific changes do you have in mind for improving the article?SovalValtos (talk) 14:11, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 8 November 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) ASUKITE 16:17, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

---

Mirpur, Pakistan → Mirpur, Azad Kashmir – 1. It is located in the Azad Kashmir region 2. It's a disputed territory between Pakistan and India, so adding Pakistan's name at the end is both unnecessary and against the Wikipedia WP:NEUTRAL policy Echo1Charlie (talk) 09:39, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose as Azad Kashmir is not a country and the city is still administered by Pakistan. --119.159.204.249 (talk) 16:50, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
• Move to Mirpur : Since "Mirpur" is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, see [page views], so per WP:NPOV, article title should be "Mirpur" only. BeanGreenCar (talk) 06:16, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

PS: and the Mirpur should to be move to Mirpur (disambiguation). BeanGreenCar (talk) 06:18, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

I don't think I can see a primary topic there. There certainly isn't one with respect to usage: the clickstream data for the month of March shows that the city received only about a third of the outgoing traffic from the dab page. – Uanfala (talk) 12:49, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

• Support. This was the title of the article between 2010 and 2016, and it ended up where it is now probably because of an omission in the reversion of a series of bold moves four years ago.
  Using the name of the territory as a disambiguator is clearly better: for the disputed territories of Kashmir we avoid article features that can be seen as indicating sovereignty. See for example the articles in the categories for Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir [2]. Only 8 use "India" as a disambiguator, vs. 42 with "Jammu and Kashmir" (and that's not because there are other places with the name within India).
  Apart from neutrality, for places in India and Pakistan (whether disputed or not), there's a general preference for disambiguating using lower-level units (though afaik, that's been codified only for India: WP:NCIND). And there's the issue of precision: this city isn't the only place with the name in Pakistan (see Mirpur#Pakistan). – Uanfala (talk) 12:49, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
• Support per Uanfala. Multiple guidelines combining can't be ignored. YttriumShrew (talk) 23:52, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 28 August 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Skarmory (talk • contribs) 04:19, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

---

• Mirpur, Azad Kashmir → Mirpur
• Mirpur → Mirpur (disambiguation)

Though this was moved to its current place recently, I agree with what user @BeanGreenCar: said, and that this should simply be called Mirpur as it is the main topic for the name. The page views continue to show that it is by far the most popular article with this name: Page view comparison . And per WP:PTOPIC and WP:COMMONNAME, in common/colloquial use the city of Mirpur that this article about is well known enough that it would be assumed "Mirpur" means Mirpur, Azad Kashmir unless the speaker specified otherwise. The other listings on the disambiguation page are for places that are quite small by comparison, or for which "Mirpur" is really an alternate name to a more common one. Middle river exports (talk) 20:02, 28 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 02:37, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Middle river exports, I've formatted the request to include the moves implied by your proposal, per the RM instructions. Please check I've got that right. Uanfala (talk) 11:01, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. There's definitely no primary topic for "Mirpur" with respect to usage. Only a fraction of readers searching for the term appear to be interested in this article: its link on the dab page was followed 64 times last month, which accounts for less than 15% of the dab visits [3]. For comparison, the place in Bangladesh alone got 72 clicks. The pageviews, widely used in RMs until recently, are largely irrelevant for cases where the dab is at the base title now that we can access more direct indicators of usage; however, even if we were going by pageviews, there wouldn't be a primary topic: it's not enough for a given article to get a higher score than the next most popular one, it needs to get more than all the others combined. As for the choice of disambiguator, the current one, "Azad Kashmir", appears to be the preferred options per last year's RM. Uanfala (talk) 11:01, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. As per the detailed rationale by Uanfala - there is, clearly, no "main topic" - Arjayay (talk) 08:42, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Demographics#Hindu and Sikh communities

This section needs to be verified, or removed. From what I can see, none of the sources are reliable or are according to WP:NPOV, but would like opinions before I make any edits on this, as I'm not very educated on this subject. نعم البدل (talk) 03:13, 29 September 2022 (UTC)