Talk:Chitral District

Kalash in Chitral
Hi Mhockey I concur this referenced content deleted by you with regard to Kalash people in Chitral, for reason quotaions without context or explanation , should have had a an explanatory note , which I will add , or you could ..and then this content is reinstated. Intothefire (talk) 05:48, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

List of referenced content removed from this article
Once the Afghan refugees and the Tablighis became entranched in Chitral, forced conversions of Kafirs began. Gun Totting Tablighis made it clear that in order to go on living in Pakistan (Pakistan means land of the pure) the Kafirs must convert to Islam. Kidnapping and forced marriage -and hence forced conversions -of the Kafir women to the Muslims, mostly Tablighi Pathans continues to this day. These women are not allowed to see their relatives unless they also convert. It is no secret that many of them are sold at auctions. Men are circumcised against their will .The Tablighis carry a Kalashnikov as a matter of routine and have killed many Kafirs who resisted conversion to Tablighi Islam. By contrast no Kafir is allowed to carry a gun. The poverty of the Kafirs has also been a major factor in their conversion to Tablighi Islam. Within the Chitral society they are completely ostracised for being "Kafirs " a term that illitrate understand to mean "infidels". The goverment does not give loans to Kafirs ; the police and the judiciary have never taken any action against the appropriation of Kafiri land by Tablighis. The only source of income for the Kafirs are the Tablighis, who lend them money at high interest. Since the Kafirs cannot pay off these loans, the only course left for them is to convert or surrender their properties to the Tablighis Intothefire (talk) 05:48, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Languages of Khyber-Puhktunkhwa (Map)
Languages of Khyber Pukhtunkhwa (Pakistan Census 1998) http://www.pbs.gov.pk/sites/default/files/other/yearbook2011/Population/16-20.pdf

Map being used in various articles pertaining to languages of Khyber Pukhtunkhwa is incorrect and biased. It is showing tank as Seraiki speaking which is incorrect as majority of people in Tank speak Pashto. It is showing Karak as Hindko speaking while we know that almost 99% of the population of Karak is Pashto speaking Khattak. It is showing battagram as hindko speaking while we all know that most of the people in Battagram speak Pashto. Similarly, it is showing Shangla as hindko speaking, which is incorrect as most of the people their also speak Pashto. Finally, it is showing Toorghar district as Hindko speaking while we know most of the people their also speak Pashto. I think all this show biasness or incompetence on the part of the person who included that Map. Furthermore, it should also be noted that the map fails to show that most of the people on western side of Mansehra and Haripur speak Pashto, while most on western side of D.I.Khan also speak Pashto. I feel that the Map has grossly exaggerated the number of speakers of other languages. Tigerkhan007 (talk) 17:22, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

I have tried to talk about the incorrect map being used with everyone, but no one has been able to provide any rationale on why the districts such as Battagram, toorghar, Shangla, Buner, Tank, Karak, etc are shown as Hindko and saraiki speaking when the text states that most of the population their speaks pashto. And also this is a matter of general knowledge that most of the population in the above mentioned districts speaks pashto. Moroever, due to this incorrect and biased map there is a contraditcion between the text and the map being used on the same articale. Therefore, i have replaced this incorrect map with a more accurate one. This will not only make the page more representative of the reallity but will also make wikipedia more reliable. Tigerkhan007 (talk) 11:14, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Chitral District. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150928012955/http://chitral.gov.pk/ to http://chitral.gov.pk/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140714152936/http://www.chitral.gov.pk/ to http://www.chitral.gov.pk/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:07, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Chitral District. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120428182719/http://www.nrb.gov.pk/lg_election/union.asp?district=70&dn= to http://www.nrb.gov.pk/lg_election/union.asp?district=70&dn=
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151110154333/http://ecp.gov.pk/GE.aspx to http://ecp.gov.pk/GE.aspx

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:50, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Languages of Chitral into Chitral District
There was previously a "languages" section in Chitral District, which was uncited and was removed in this edit in March 2019 with summary "remove unsourced claim(s)". Languages of Chitral was a redirect to Chitral District, which has not existed since that 2019 edit. It would seem more appropriate for this current text, created today (and upgraded by me before I realised the history), which has a couple of sources, to be part of the main article about the district. Pam D  09:05, 13 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Please remove this tag i created Languages of Chitral page secretly.103.255.7.41 (talk) 10:37, 13 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Support - "Languages of X" pages are rarely needed. "X" is the main topic. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:56, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Support - completely unnecessary stub which could readily be handled on the target page.  Onel 5969  TT me 11:02, 13 March 2022 (UTC)


 * - Oppose - Chitral is a linguistically diverse area and that is why the article shouldn't be merged. Also Chitral District doesn't exist anymore. SavageBWiki (talk) 19:41, 16 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Oppose per SavageBWiki. 103.141.159.74 (talk) 09:21, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Support as a very straightforward application of Summary style. "Languages of X" is a subtopic of "X" and is normally covered in the main article; it makes sense to fork it out into a separate page only if it gets too big and detailed. Chitral District (which still exists as an article about the former district and the historic/cultural region) is small (500 words), and Languages of Chitral is tiny (90 words), so there's no case at all for a separate article. – Uanfala (talk) 12:37, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Support per above, it should be merged. Sahaib (talk) 11:46, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Support same as already stated. - FactsResearcher (talk) 17:33, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Languages of Chitral
Shouldn't we merge the sources as well? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:35, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I could see one relevant source and I used it . Is there anything I'm missing? – Uanfala (talk) 16:44, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * This one? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:51, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I didn't use that because it enumerates the languages of a much wider region. But if there's any specific content you'd like to add based on that source, just go ahead! – Uanfala (talk) 18:01, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * If you think this source is unnecessary then it is OK. Thanks for the merge . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:13, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Protection
For what reason does this page have protection? 2A02:C7C:507D:0:E045:7934:D744:BD39 (talk) 00:00, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * It got the protection in 2015 : there appears to have been a lot of disruptive editing at the time. I'm wondering though, it's been almost 8 years now, and it's likely the people causing disruption at the time will have now moved on. Pinging, who was the last to apply protection: do you think it could be lifted? – Uanfala (talk) 00:15, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Sure, let's give it a try. DMacks (talk) 14:46, 7 March 2023 (UTC)