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, 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 &lt;talk&gt; 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
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
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)


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

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one 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 ).

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


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg 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.  Anon 126   (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 |Indian 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 |'The 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 |United Nations Security Council Resolution 47, |United Nations Security Council Resolution 39,|UN mediation of the Kashmir dispute, |United 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 [|Mirpur_Model_Thana|Mirpur_DOHS|Mirpur_Upazila|Mirpur_College|Mirpur_Turk|Mirpur,_Sirohi|Mirpur_Khas|Mirpur,_Khyber_Pakhtunkhwa|Mirpur_Mathelo 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)

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.
 * 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 . 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). – 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)

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 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)
 * , 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)

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.
 * 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 . 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)

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)