Talk:Pakistan/Archive 22

Punjabi dialects.
Saraiki,Hindko and pothwari are dialects of Punjabi, they are not separate languages. There is no ethnicity such as saraiki. They are Punjabi. Don't push this nonsense agenda of dividing Punjabis. They may get their own province but nobody can change their ethnicity of being Punjabi. Where I am from, we speak dhani dialect. Dialect cannot be considered a separate language. 39.41.133.197 (talk) 13:28, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 March 2022
I needa change some of the images I have better ones to show Pakistan :) 70.50.96.173 (talk) 22:26, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:34, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 March 2022
Yesterday an user removed Pakistan orthographic projection map and uploaded uploaded his created low quality map on article. 103.141.159.74 (talk) 18:27, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. How is the map low quality? — LauritzT (talk) 08:25, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 March 2022
"In the 2017 census, the Hindu (jati) population was found to be 4,444,437." Kindly remove the word (jati) after Hindu. It is a little misleading word. It does not defines Hinduism completely and also not needed in this sentence. Pratham0320 (talk) 07:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ — LauritzT (talk) 08:36, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 March 2022
LancePHYT (talk) 16:47, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. CMD (talk) 17:23, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Map of Pakistan is Wrong.
The PoK is an integral part of The Republic of India. It should not have been shown as part of Pakistan. Please correct the map. 2409:4042:4C06:7C76:0:0:4DCB:4201 (talk) 20:09, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 April 2022
Gdp nominal 460.8 billion Gdp ppp 1.5 trillion Ansnwkkn (talk) 10:50, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

J Ansnwkkn (talk) 10:50, 7 April 2022 (UTC)


 * X mark.svg Not done No source provided. — Manti  core  11:47, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 April 2022
39.40.178.104 (talk) 10:03, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Driving side is right in Pakistan not left
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. CMD (talk) 12:22, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Full protection edit request
I would like to request a full edit protection so to avoid bias and controversy and to make sure that the administrators are eligible for editing the page with facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NameIsShaheer (talk • contribs) 19:33, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Success: Low confidence movement!
Imran khan looses government due to lack of confidence by National Assembly members. He received 174 votes against his prime ministership. Ubaidurrehman510 (talk) 20:14, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Prime minister
Shahbaz Sharif elected as new prime minister 223.186.14.114 (talk) 12:44, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Please update the information according to the 2017 Census
On the Pakistan page, it says that Punjabis are 44.7% of the Pakistan Population but that is outdated information from the 1998 census

According to the most recent 2017 Census, Punjabis are 38.78% of the population.

Please update the “Ethnic groups” part of this page using the official information.

These are the official figures:

Population by ethnic group (percentage): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_Pakistan

The map on the page above shows the updated percentages by ethnic group according to the most recent 2017 Census. MT111222 (talk) 16:48, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 April 2022
Raja Parvesh Ashraf is nominated as Speaker of the National Assembly, no more Acting Speaker is to be mentioned MajeedSheikh08 (talk) 15:04, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. 01:51, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Languages/Ethnicity percentage mismatch as requested in my talk page
The following request was made at my talk page here :

On the Pakistan page, it says that Punjabis are 44.7% of the Pakistan Population but that is outdated information from the 1998 census.

According to the most recent (2017 Census), Punjabis are 38.78% of the population.

Please update the “Ethnic groups” part of the “Pakistan” page using the updated statistics from the 2017 Census.

These are the official figures:

Population by ethnic group: www.pbs.gov.pk/sites/default/files//population_census/census_2017_tables/pakistan/Table11n.pdf

Population by ethnic group (percentage): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_Pakistan

The map on the page above shows the most recent percentages according to the 2017 census.

Here is the Pakistan page: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan MT111222 (talk) 12:58, 17 April 2022 (UTC)


 * It is possible that the ethnic groups and number of speakers would not match, for example, many Punjabis might report their language as Urdu or something else instead of Punjabi, but when it comes to ethnicity, they'd identify as Punjabi. On top of that different agencies and years come to play. Since the infobox has separate sections on Regional languages and Ethnic groups with sources (with year), it would be unwise to modify them without a WP:CONSENSUS in Talk:Pakistan, especially since it is a level-3 vital article. I'll move the discussion there for consensus. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:05, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

---


 * The only thing that can be done as before any consensus would be to include the year "(2017)" next to the Regional languages parameter as done with the Ethnic groups and Religion parameters in the infbox. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:13, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Pakistan Census doesn't ask for the ethnicity. They only ask for native language of the person.

44.7% was the percentage of Pakistanis that wrote down Punjabi as their mother tongue in the 1998 Census.

In the 2017 Census, that dropped down to 38.78%.

You can make a clear comparison because the same question was asked in 1998 and 2017.

MT111222 (talk) 14:18, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Regional languages and Ethnic groups should have the same data because the only question that the Pakistan Census asks is "What is your mother tongue?"

No questions about the ethnicity of the person are asked. MT111222 (talk) 14:22, 17 April 2022 (UTC)


 * As I can see, the source for ethnicity used in the infobox is taken from this CIA link not the census. I don't know how they are getting into these numbers, but you can see there is some discrepancy when it comes to Ethnic groups and Languages (44.7% vs 48% in the case of Punjabis for wxample). Anyway, I'd like editors experienced with this particular topic area to get involved regrading this . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:39, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

It's an unreliable source.

They used the 1981 census language data for "languages" and a mixture of 1981 and 1998 language data for "ethnic groups".

For example, Punjabis were 48% of the population in 1998 Census and Pashtuns were 8% of the population according to the 1972 census.

The Factbook has mixed up the two census data.

As you can see, according to the 2017 Census, Punjabi speakers are 38.78% of the population and Pashto speakers are 18.24% of the population.

While the CIA factbook says Punjabi speakers are 48% of the population and Pashto speakers are 8% of the population.

This just shows how unreliable and outdated the factbook is. MT111222 (talk) 15:10, 17 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Can you ping other editors who frequent this page? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:28, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Can't you edit it? I have given all the sources for the data. MT111222 (talk) 18:06, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 April 2022
Hello moderators, Greetings. I am NameIsShaheer and I have submitted an request for edit-access this is because I want to do minor modifications into the Languages section, I would be happy if the mods of this article gave me permission.

Thank you! NameIsShaheer (talk) 12:14, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Permission cannot be granted on a page by page basis. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. CMD (talk) 14:57, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Pakistan GDP
Reference to State bank of Pakistan and Ministry of Economic affairs, Pakistan GDP is 347 billion dollars as per 2021 so please allow us to correct these figures. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashxan (talk • contribs) 05:46, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Edit Request on the Pakistan page
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2348208/6th-census-results-get-official-nod-after-five-year-gap As written in this article by Tribune.pk which is one of the best and most authentic news site in pakistan, the governing council had come to the conclusion that "The size of the economy in dollar terms has jumped to $347 billion -- estimated at Rs64 trillion by June this year in rupee term." This change has been made in the page about the economy of pakistan however has not been made in this page, therefore with all due respect I request the editors to edit the economy of pakistan on this page as well Mujahid Sons (talk) 11:24, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting wait.svg Already done SpinningCeres 15:09, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 March 2022
Pakistan's GDP nominal is $347 billion and GDP PPP is $1.5 trillion please add it to the article.

Sources: https://www.finance.gov.pk/economic/economic_update_january_2022.pdf

https://www.brecorder.com/news/40099341

https://www.imf.org/en/Countries/PAK

2400:ADC1:477:8500:3D43:4EEC:D5A5:C2B1 (talk) 10:03, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * GDP seems to be updated, but GDP PPP looks to be correct. The 1.5 trillion figure isn't actually GDP PPP I think (see this link and note "PPPGDP" in URL.) SpinningCeres 14:38, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 April 2022
The GDP numbers have been revised and republished by Pakistan Govt. The GDP size has increased to $346.7 billion in FY 21 compared to $298 billion stated earlier. This ranks Pakistan at 35th position in terms of world economies. As a result, the per capita income of the country has risen to $1,666 compared to $1,543; while the public debt to GDP ratio has reduced to 72% from 84%.

Reference links: - https://profit.pakistantoday.com.pk/2022/01/23/the-gdp-finally-rebased/ - https://www.dawn.com/news/1670673/govt-revises-up-fy21-growth-rate-to-54pc-gdp-to-347bn - https://tribune.com.pk/story/2339672/rebasing-of-economy-pays-dividend-to-govt Lucy.Sanders.999 (talk) 19:16, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
 * See other request. I've not updated GDP per capita because that typically is sourced to the IMF it seems and I can't find that figure. SpinningCeres 15:09, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 May 2022
Ashxan (talk) 12:28, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. CMD (talk) 13:38, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 May 2022
The data for "Ethnic groups" is outdated

It says that Punjabis are 44.7% of the Pakistan Population but that is outdated information from the 1998 census. According to the most recent (2017 Census), Punjabis are 38.78% of the population.

The CIA factbook's data is outdated as it is from the 1998 census and not from the most recent 2017 census.

It also says that Pashtuns are 15.4% of the population but that is according to the 1998 census. According to the 2017 Census, they are now 18.24% of the population. So this data is outdated too.

Please update the “Ethnic groups” part of the “Pakistan” page using the updated statistics from the 2017 Census.

These are the official figures:

Population by ethnic group: www.pbs.gov.pk/sites/default/files//population_census/census_2017_tables/pakistan/Table11n.pdf

Population by ethnic group (percentage): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_Pakistan

The map on the wiki page above shows the most recent percentages according to the 2017 census.

So please correct the percentages of the "Ethnic groups" section. Punjabis are 38.78% of Pakistan's population not 44.7%.

MT111222 (talk) 21:54, 16 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: So I've taken the time to find and read the census (or rather, the relevant section) that you linked, and I've found where you are getting the figure. It's table 2.7 (PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION BY MOTHER TONGUE AND RURAL/URBAN: CENSUS YEAR 1998 AND 2017). It is on the PDF called Pakistan National Census Report 2017.
 * It does indeed say that the people who reported their language as Punjabi in 2017 was 33.78%. However, as brought up by Fylindfotberserk on April 17th, that still doesn't rule out that people may list their language differently from their ethnicity. All other possible issues mentioned by the same user still persist. Furthermore, the census reports that in 1998 the total number was 44.15% and not 44.7%, so now the CIA factbook is in even more conflict. All of that said, I would reaffirm that consensus or discussion of some kind needs to happen for the community to determine how they wish to handle this. This would not be handled via an edit request.
 * I understand this must be frustrating, as you've mentioned this multiple times over the course of a month, but that's just simply where we stand at this time. — Sirdog (talk) 04:33, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

The data for "Ethnic groups" is outdated
It says that Punjabis are 44.7% of the Pakistan Population but that is outdated information from the 1998 census. According to the most recent (2017 Census), Punjabis are 38.78% of the population.

The CIA factbook's data is outdated as it is from the 1998 census and not from the most recent 2017 census.

It also says that Pashtuns are 15.4% of the population but that is according to the 1998 census. According to the 2017 Census, they are now 18.24% of the population. So this data is outdated too.

Please update the “Ethnic groups” part of the “Pakistan” page using the updated statistics from the 2017 Census.

These are the official figures:

Population by ethnic group: www.pbs.gov.pk/sites/default/files//population_census/census_2017_tables/pakistan/Table11n.pdf

Population by ethnic group (percentage): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_Pakistan

The map on the page above shows the most recent percentages according to the 2017 census. MT111222 (talk) 14:01, 10 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Pakistan's 2017 census does not cover ethnic groups, only languages by population (which is the numbers to which you are referring). Due to this absence, the CIA factbook data on ethnic group proportion % estimates is fine, as it is a source used on other wiki ethnic group pages. Van00220 (talk) 00:22, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Map of Pakistan (Junagadh and Manawadar)
Junagadh was constitutionally given to Pakistan by the Nawab of Junagadh. So Junagadh and Manawadar both are an integral part of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. You can check it from the Official Map of Pakistan. 103.7.79.22 (talk) 08:23, 19 May 2022 (UTC)


 * ❌: Provide reliable sources supporting your statement. You can start discussions on Talk:Manavadar and Talk:Junagadh.  Sneha04   💬 18:58, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 May 2022
GDP (nominal)    2021 estimate • Total Increase $348 billion to GDP (nominal)    2022 estimate • Total Increase $383 billion

Reference: https://tribune.com.pk/story/2357283/with-6-growth-rate-pakistans-economic-size-jumps-to-383-billion 59.103.212.225 (talk) 10:12, 19 May 2022 (UTC)


 * ❌: IMF or World bank sources are considered most reliable on Wikipedia's article space and is used in most of following consensus at WikiProject Economics. Sneha04   💬 18:35, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 May 2022
Adeel Rana NYPD Deputy Inspector, 2603:7000:693B:2F5A:60D0:14F4:9CFB:E37E (talk) 19:35, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 21:15, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 June 2022
Pakistan,Federal Parliamentary Republic.Pakistan is Fifth most populated country. Kianaamhatumhara (talk) 06:01, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Pakistan,Federal Parlimentary Republic of Pakistan. Kianaamhatumhara (talk) 06:02, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Baggaet (talk) 03:21, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Editing request
The nominal GDP of Pakistan as of 2022 has reached 402 Billion USD. 110.39.217.205 (talk) 11:17, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Edit Request on the Pakistan GDP
As per 2022, Pakistan's Gross Domestic Product has reached 403 Billion USD. 110.39.217.205 (talk) 11:21, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Clarification needed
>When Mountbatten was asked by Collins and Lapierre if he would have sabotaged Pakistan had he known that Jinnah was dying of tuberculosis, he replied 'most probably'.

Neither Collins nor Lapierre are mentioned previously in the article. Who are Collins & Lapierre? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cerise (talk • contribs) 21:32, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 June 2022
Sir, According to the economic survey of Pakistan 2021-22 the total GDP Nominal of Pakistan is 383 billion USD. Per Capita is 1798 USD. GDP growth rate of 2021 22 was 5.97% and GDP growth rate for the year 2022- 23 will be 5%.

Here is the source

https://www.finance.gov.pk/survey_2022.html HaroonBotanist (talk) 02:55, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: The infobox uses the International Monetary Fund as the source for its GDP data. Infobox country examples also use the IMF as their source, so I don't see a point in using the Pakistani government data over the IMF. SWinxy (talk) 00:12, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Change the Parliament houses names to their official names.
Please change the Parliament houses names under legislature section to their official names

which are;

Upper House: Aiwān-e-Bālā (Senate)

Lower House: Aiwān-e-Zairīñ (National Assembly)

Its really sad to see the unofficial English names here when we use proper official names in our country Muaz Rana (talk) 17:22, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 June 2022
Just a quick one the see also section has a Crime in Pakistan link which it seems irrelevant and is present in the body of the page it does not need to be repeated as most country pages do not have the crime see also section I think it should ve removed 90tillinfinitydue (talk) 21:58, 28 June 2022 (UTC) 90tillinfinitydue (talk) 21:58, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. It seems related, and isn't linked anywhere in the article text. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:04, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks I believe a prominent mention of a crime link is undue and is not the norm for most nation pages example regional countries like India, Bangladesh and Nepal do not have a see also section for crime. 90tillinfinitydue (talk) 13:44, 30 June 2022 (UTC)


 * @90tillinfinitydue sometimes it feels like a propaganda against us Pakistanis Muaz Rana (talk) 20:56, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

The CIA factbook is using the 1998 Pakistan Census Languages data and calling it the ethnic group percentage
The CIA factbook is using the 1981 and 1998 Pakistan Census Languages data as the ethnic group percentage. So just use the 2017 Pakistan languages data instead, which is the latest data.

For example, the Pakistan languages data of the 1998 census was the following:

Punjabi - 44.5%

Pashto - 15.4%

Sindhi - 14.1%

And this is being shown by the CIA Factbook as the "Ethnic Groups of Pakistan". If you're gonna use the 1998 Census language data and call it the "Ethnic group percentage" then just use the 2017 Pakistan census language data instead at least it is the most recent data. MT111222 (talk) 07:16, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Pakistan's current GDP isn't accurate.
For current fiscal year, GDP at current market prices stands at Rs 66,950 billion showed a growth of 20.0 percent over last year (Rs 55,796 billion). In the dollar term, it remained at US$ 383 billion. Gross National Income (GNI) is also used for measuring and tracking a nation’s wealth which is calculated by adding Net Primary Income (NPI) to GDP (MP).

Source:https://pkrevenue.com/pakistan-achieves-5-97-gdp-growth-in-2021-2022-economic-survey/#:~:text=Pakistan%20achieves%205.97%25%20GDP%20growth%20in%202021%2F2022%3A%20Economic%20Survey,-June%209%2C%202022&text=ISLAMABAD%3A%20Pakistan%20has%20achieved%20the,the%20fiscal%20year%202021%2F2022. 110.39.217.205 (talk) 21:10, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Pakistan was created for Islam but it has been sabotaged by Ahmadiyya
An important point the article is missing is the Ahmadiyya role in Pakistan. At the time of Pakistan creation, Ahmadiyya elements were present in the talks and governing of Pakistan. The first foreign minister of Pakistan Muhammad Zafarullah Khan belonged to Ahmadiyya group. The Ahmadiyya believed that Pakistan was made for Ahmadiyya as Ahmadiyya believe they are the only true Muslims and non-Ahmadi are kafir. A famous quote of Muhammad Zafarullah Khan was that he said “is Muhammad Ali Jinnah a Muslim ruler of a kafir country or a kafir ruler of a Muslim country.” The meaning is that Pakistan, in his mindset, was Ahmadi country. Over the years, Ahmadiyya worked hard to gain control of Pakistan through covert operations and have now taken total control of the country, as evidenced by the public’s suffering. In Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq time, the army greatly transformed. From being the servants of the country, protecting the people, they became the rulers of the country and holding all reins. Ahmadiyya and a distorted Seerat AnNabi (biography of Prophet Muhammad sallaho alaihi wassalam) was preached in the armed forces and the soldiers and people were converted to Ahmadism, while externally it was popularised that Ahmadiyya were mistreated and oppressed - striking two birds with one stone. Ahmadiyya were made high ranking officers in the armed forces as well as in banks and industries and colleges while those who didn’t convert remained in low ranks. In this way, the control of the country was held by the covert Ahmadiyya. Ahmadiyya now completely control the Pakistan, its resources and its government, while the public suffers. One day, Ahmadiyya may openly say “Pakistan is an Ahmadi country.” Gemini210 (talk) 22:18, 7 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Gemini210, we are going to need lots of sources for that. ZetaFive (talk) 22:38, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

The map is wrong gujraat areas are not disputed like Kashmir
Only Kashmir is disputed that will be resolved by bilaterally 2409:4081:8909:7E79:0:0:EA7:50AC (talk) 15:50, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

kashmir disputed
pakistan area of kashmir is called azad kashmir and indian kashmir are called jambo kashmir.kashmir is disputed in the independent from united kingdom in 14th aug 1947 123.108.93.155 (talk) 14:37, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 September 2022
Driving side in Pakistan is right hand side. its written LHS. Please do the correction. 2400:ADC7:904:D200:3DC3:BDCC:C39B:9826 (talk) 21:51, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Pakistan appears to be driving on the left side like many former British colonies, per the cited source in the article as well as other sources such as the U.S. State Department . – Recoil (talk) 20:26, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Middle versus Regional power
A couple of notes. The current edit warring is problematic (beyond it being an edit war, per se.) in a number of ways. First and foremost, while consensus can change, making such a change with an existing source that states otherwise is inappropriate. The source needs to reflect whatever text it attributes. That's such a basic thing, it's puzzling to see it being overlooked by experienced editors. 2ndly, referencing consensus from 4 years ago, or from 6 years ago, all discussions whose consensus was not codified at the time through a fomral closure, is also problematic.

It's especially problematic when disputants refer just to the consensus itself, rather than the substance of the contested content. While, as noted, text-to-citation is inflexible, WP:ONUS is less so. Otherwise, it'd just be the Consensus required rule, at which point one could simply say that a new consensus is needed, declaratively, and nothing else. But at the event, the expectation is for disputants to actually explain themselves substantively, rather than vaguely pointing to discussions from years ago. Please do better, everyone. El_C 16:18, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, there was formal closure on regional power. See Talk:Regional power/Archive 5. Pakistan was discussed extensively in the RfC because it lacks quality sourcing. It hasn't been added to Regional power itself since that discussion. Same should happen here. --Yoonadue (talk) 16:44, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh, I missed that. But that is an exceptionally poor, exceptionally brief and undetailed closing summary for such an important multi-faceted matter. But regardless, all of you should follow the general ethos of WP:LOCALCONSENSUS by dealing with Pakistan, specifically and in detail, here, on its country article page. El_C 16:59, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes it can be discussed here as well. I will look forward to any new scholarly sources with enough details and those that were not already analyzed in those discussions. --Yoonadue (talk) 17:58, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Might be worth running a dedicated RfC here to settle the matter once and for all, but I'll leave that to whomever's discretion (for now, at least). El_C 18:11, 15 October 2022 (UTC)


 * You're probably aware of this already, but it's worth noting that that RfC didn't establish consensus against the term "regional power", only for a threshold of sourcing needed to make that statement. Which is honestly pretty pointless, because CONTEXTMATTERS really ought to be applied everywhere. The other section linked here contains a lot of cherry-picking by most of the participants, and some original research, but doesn't constitute any consensus either. Particularly given that multiple participants from both "sides" have been indeffed since, a new consensus-building exercise is probably necessary. As my stamina for a nonsensical dispute over a nonsensical label is zero, I will not be doing anything about it (this is honestly very similar to the MEK is a cult/isn't a cult nonsense). Vanamonde (Talk) 18:29, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * it's a cult... ish! Actually, no, I wasn't aware, I just sort of skimmed it. But that ("new consensus-building exercise") makes sense and generally aligns with my current position. Yeah, getting an admin to oversee troubled pages/matters such as these is, to put it midly, challenging. For those reasons and more. To that: I, too, can't commit to doing so here. I only encountered this at RfPP in passing (permalink), but I highly doubt I'd be able to spare the time or energy for this kind of rabbit hole, either. El_C 18:48, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Seeing as I'm passing hard on this, I can hardly blame you for doing the same! Vanamonde (Talk) 19:21, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Why Pakistan is not given respect?
Pakistan is a great country but every body calls us bad. 2400:ADC5:1A0:A400:ED4E:E50A:8F8C:1B (talk) 14:43, 20 October 2022 (UTC)


 * The fact that you are asking this question probably partially explains it. You can't demand respect from other people. Respect has to be earned. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 05:16, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Junagadh ("and Manavadar")
There needs to be some kind of an elaboration in the main article space about the inclusion of Junagadh ("and Manavadar") in the info-box map. Currently, this piece of territory is depicted as being claimed by Pakistan and controlled by India, but there is no explanation anywhere throughout the article as to why this is the case. I've done my own brief research, and it seems that Pakistan's claim to Junagadh (which includes Manavadar, much like Kosovo "and Metohija" that is claimed by Serbia) is almost entirely symbolic in nature. Nobody in Pakistan seriously believes that Junagadh is worth fighting for or could feasibly actually be acquired by Pakistan. In essence, Pakistan is simply claiming Junagadh in order to annoy the Indians, so it's more of a political ploy than a genuine territorial dispute. The territory of Junagadh is not connected to Pakistan by land, so there's very little hope of Pakistan gaining control of it (I mean, Pakistan controlled East Pakistan i.e. Bangladesh for a while, but that clearly didn't work out). Pakistan did not officially claim Junagadh until August 2020, when they decided to add it to their official map. It seems that Pakistan's interest in Junagadh is largely politically/symbolically connected to its interest in Kashmir. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 00:33, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Relevant RfC from last year: Talk:Pakistan/Archive 21. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 00:51, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

GINI index is low for Pakistan instead of medium
The value is 29.6 which comes under "low" category. Needs to be changed. Haroon Fida (talk) 20:26, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 November 2022
Pakistan,officially Republic of Pakistan Emanli (talk) 19:24, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Pakistan as secular nation,where hindus,christians,buddhists and other religions may live. Emanli (talk) 19:25, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. – dudhhr talk contribs (he/they) 19:52, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

1971 Bangladesh genocide - Why is it missing?
Why is there no mention of 1971 Bangladesh genocide committed by the Pakistan military? There is an academic consensus that the events which took place during the Bangladesh Liberation War constituted a genocide. That's like an article on Germany without mentioning the Holocaust. EmiratiEmir (talk) 21:04, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Regional Languages Misleading
Kindly reverse the regional languages section. Its misleading! Agent05032 (talk) 10:58, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Can you provide a bit more detail into the issue? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:05, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 November 2022
Pakistan, as Republic of Pakistan Emanli (talk) 19:32, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Pakistan Emanli (talk) 19:33, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 19:47, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Map is wrong
Pakistan only claims kashmir and a piece of Gujarat near the southern part of the Gujarat-Pakistan border, not Junagadh. 2601:154:C47E:3AA0:85D5:9FD:A798:1A22 (talk) 00:17, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:56, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Flag of Gilgit-Baltistan.svg

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 December 2022
The CIA data source is using the 1981 and 1998 Census language data as "ethnicity data". Pakistan doesn't ask for the ethnicity of the people in its census. They ask about the mother tongue which tells us the person's ethnicity. For example, the mother tongue of a Punjabi will be Punjabi and for a Pashtun it will be Pashto etc.

The actual stats can also be found on the Pakistan Languages Wikipedia page. Punjabis are 38.78% of the population not 44.7%. Pashtuns are 18.24% of the population not 15.2% Sindhis are 14.5% of the population not 14.1%. There are many more corrections needed too. The CIA Factbook has used outdated language data from 1998 and 1981 census so please use the official 2017 Pakistan Census as a source and correct it. MT111222 (talk) 07:55, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Please change the "Ethnic Groups" section data to the following:

Punjabis 38.78%

Pashtuns 18.24%

Sindhis 14.57%

Saraikis 12.19%

Muhajirs 7.08%

Baloch 3.02%

Others 6.12% MT111222 (talk) 07:59, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Please change the ethnic group data to the following:

Punjabis from 44.7% to 38.78%

Pashtuns from 15.4% to 18.24%

Sindhis from 14.1% to 14.57%

Saraikis from 8.4% to 12.19%

Muhajirs from 7.6% to 7.08%

Baloch from 3.6% to 3.02%

Others from 6.3% to 6.12%

MT111222 (talk) 08:03, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Also, using wikipedia as reference likely to become WP:CIRCLE Lemonaka (talk) 16:08, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Website section should be removed
It's not appropriate to provide a nation's website link in its article. Referring to other nations' articles, their nations' respective websites are not included. I think the website section should be removed. Skrizlee (talk) 22:09, 27 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Done, CMD (talk) 02:27, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

December 2022
Pakistan GDP Nominal is 1.04trillions GDP PPP is 3.35trillions — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.101.165.202 (talk) 11:05, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * . Not supported by a source. —Alalch E. 11:30, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Shorten the article
This article is insanely long, way past what WP:Size allows. What should we do about it? CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 11:55, 10 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Good catch, the article is way too long and difficult to read comfortably. Many sections, I think specially "Independence and modern Pakistan" or "role of Islam" are way too detailed and the whole article can simply be trimmed. Looking forward for more opinions Jamal047 (talk) 12:34, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 December 2022
Driving side in Pakistan is right side — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdulllahkamran (talk • contribs) 13:47, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Driving side in Pakistan is right side not left side Abdulllahkamran (talk) 13:48, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Driving side in Pakistan is right side Abdulllahkamran (talk) 13:51, 2 December 2022 (UTC)


 * they drive opposite to a steering wheel, which means left side PreserveOurHistory (talk) 04:24, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 December 2022
The CIA data source is using the 1981 and 1998 Census language data as "ethnicity data". Pakistan doesn't ask for the ethnicity of the people in its census. They ask about the mother tongue which tells us the person's ethnicity. For example, the mother tongue of a Punjabi will be Punjabi and for a Pashtun, it will be Pashto etc.

The most recent census data can also be found on the Pakistan Bureau of Statistics website page.

Link to 2017 Pakistan Census language data:

https://www.pbs.gov.pk/sites/default/files/population/2017/tables/pakistan/Table11n.pdf

The CIA Factbook has used outdated language data from 1998 and 1981 census so please use the official 2017 Pakistan Census as a source and correct it. Please change the ethnic group data to the following:

Punjabis from 44.7% to 38.78%

Pashtuns from 15.4% to 18.24%

Sindhis from 14.1% to 14.57%

Saraikis from 8.4% to 12.19%

Muhajirs from 7.6% to 7.08%

Baloch from 3.6% to 3.02%

Others from 6.3% to 6.12% MT111222 (talk) 06:54, 23 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Done, thanks for pointing it out Jamal047 (talk) 12:20, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @Jamal047 Please change the answered parameter to yes when responding! I've closed it for now. Aaron Liu (talk) 12:48, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 December 2022
Chief of Army Staff and JCSC names needs to be changed in Military Section, please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.175.67.161 (talk) 05:44, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Additionally, you didn't use the edit extended-protected template. Aaron Liu (talk)

Edit request
Please note that in the motto section, 'Faith-Unity-Discipline' Discipline in urdu is not translate to Nazm but to Tanzeem تنظیم.

Also note that in the driving side section, in Pakistan tge driving side is right and not left as mentioned otherwise.

111.119.183.7 (talk) 06:24, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Left side driving is sourced. Please provide a source that says that Pakistan drives on the right. I'll let someone else comment on the translation. --RegentsPark (comment) 16:19, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: As RegentsPark said, the driving side must require a reliable source. Regarding the translation, the article for the motto, Faith, Unity, Discipline, seems to say otherwise. If you believe that is incorrect, you can bring it up on that article's talk page ~ Eejit43 ( talk ) 18:27, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

random sentence in Demographics section
There is a random and incorrect sentence in the Demographics section. It reads:

“[|Pakistan has population of 250 Million]”

Please delete. 2001:8003:3F38:E300:1047:C9DF:E312:77D (talk) 12:42, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

How could a Part of Gujrat, an Indian State, be claimed by Pakistan?
As mentioned above, Wikipedia shows some part of Gujarat, an Indian state, claimed by Pakistan. How can they claim it, and further how can Wiki show it so? You should remove the statement. 43.241.25.66 (talk) 07:16, 10 February 2023 (UTC)


 * The background behind the claim can be found at Annexation of Junagadh. CMD (talk) 07:19, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 February 2023
I am writing this request to edit the part of Pakistan movement and Pakistan's independence because some of the things over there seem to be quite misleading. Azeem sher e Pak (talk) 18:24, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone may add them for you. Kautilya3 (talk) 18:28, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Questionable deletion of content
deleted the following fragment, claiming "Which is why I said "not what the source says". Read the source":

The first source says:

And the second source:

Can User:Uzek explain what he means by "not what the source says"? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:18, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

When I read "Pakistan defended concentration camps" I was expecting literal defending/agreeing with the concentration camps not denying they exist or complaining about "sensationalization of the issue by foreign media" by God knows which person. This looks like fake news to begin with or an attempt at WP: SYNTHESIS Uzek (talk) 10:13, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

User:Kautilya3 Why did you restore exactly the same looking sentence with the same meaning with a misleading edit summary of a "clarified" version without engaging here first?

Do you understand what defending something means ? Uzek (talk) 14:12, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Also another thing, WHY are you leaving MISLEADING EDIT SUMMARIES + warning messages on my talk page about "SEVERAL REVERTS" (I only reverted one edit) when it is you who is edit warring? lol

Uzek (talk) 14:26, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 * The sentence doesn't need to be added into a country article anyway per WP:NOTNEWS. Oriental Aristocrat (talk) 07:14, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Junagadh and Manavadar
Junagadh and Manavadar are claimed by Pakistan since 1947, you can find it on the official website of Pakistan (official map of Pakistan) no idea who but someone is trying to change it. 39.37.152.55 (talk) 20:04, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Secularism
Is Pakistan a Secular country or Islamic country?

Doesn't article 20, 21, 22, 25 makes Pakistan a Secular country which deals with human rights, freedom and Equality. Doesn't it necessary to mention those in religion section of this page.

The main principles of Secularism in the Constitution of Pakistan were incorporated in its Human rights in Pakistan/fundamental rights which were granted under various articles of 20, 21, 22 & 25 of the constitution. -

(a) Article 20 : Freedom to profess religion and to manage religious institutions.

(b) Article 21 : Safeguard against taxation for purposes of any particular religion.Pakistan Laws on Human Rights - Humanitarian Library

(c) Article 22 : Safeguards as to educational institutions in respect of religion, etc.

(d) Article 25 : Equality of citizens.

, What's your opinion regarding this ? Pitush Puttar (talk) 17:46, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Furthermore, Pakistan didn't adopt Islamic Sharia laws in its constitution. It's constitution still have British Legacies.

Isn't it MOS; as it's putting "Islamic" sentiment first in the religious article of this page? Pitush Puttar (talk) 17:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)


 * The constitution is a primary source. Analyzing, evaluating, and interpreting whether various articles of it mean that Pakistan is secular or Islamic is not allowed on Wikipedia. Secondary sources, preferably recent books by scholars published by academic presses, are required in order to answer the question. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:13, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 March 2023
I would like to add the Mongols in this list as clearly Pakistan was part of the Mongol empire.

Pakistan was the realm of multiple empires and dynasties, including the Achaemenid; briefly that of Alexander the Great; the Seleucid, the Maurya, the Kushan, the Gupta;[20] the Umayyad Caliphate in its southern regions, the Hindu Shahis, the Ghaznavids, the Delhi Sultanate, the Mughals,[21] the Durranis, the Omani Empire, the Sikh Empire, British East India Company rule, and most recently, the British Raj from 1858 to 1947. 2603:8000:2C41:C000:4909:4BD2:AED5:9461 (talk) 06:44, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * It is not clear what list you are referring to and you haven't provided any sources. --RegentsPark (comment) 07:03, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Census 2023
The 2023 census would be announced on 30 April 2023 so yes big changes, etc. 182.179.173.82 (talk) 15:45, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 March 2023
There is no evidence for the quote from Rahmat Ali in the explanation of the name on the main page. It does not appear anywhere in Now or Never. I think we should replace it with the following, which actually comes from Now Or Never:

"I am enclosing herewith an appeal on behalf of the thirty million Muslims of PAKISTAN, who live in the five Northern Units of India--Punjab, North-West Frontier (Afghan) Province, Kashmir, Sind, and Baluchistan. It embodies their demand for the recognition of their national status, as distinct from the other inhabitants of India, by the grant to Pakistan of a separate Federal Constitution on religious, social and historical grounds." Scarsdale.vibe (talk) 22:58, 23 March 2023 (UTC)


 * PAKISTAN is indeed an acronym coined by Rahmat Ali. Solblaze (talk) 07:41, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. Actualcpscm (talk) 12:03, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Repeated Information
The explanation of Urdu being the 'lingua franca' of Pakistan's languages, has been mentioned twice in identical fashion. The bottom paragraph of "Demographics" & also immediately underneath in the first paragraph of Ethnicity and languages. I am unable to edit this myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nix D (talk • contribs) 14:34, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 April 2023
46.184.88.124 (talk) 05:04, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Tollens (talk) 05:57, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 April 2023
Gucciii armanii (talk) 12:50, 6 April 2023 (UTC) Change report
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 12:55, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 April 2023 (2)
PAKISTANS POPULATION 250 MILLION Mustaqim raja (talk) 22:57, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 23:07, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 April 2023 (2)
I think that the provincial languages section should be removed as it minimizes the presence of other languages in their respective provinces, e.g. Khowar in KPK, Hindko in KPK, Brahui in Balochistan. Also, Gilgit-Baltistan and Azad Jammu and Kashmir are technically not provinces but have their own languages that should be recognized. Only including Pashto, Punjabi, and Sindhi in the info-box disregards the dozens of other languages spoken in Pakistan. And, Balochi isn't even included in the list for some reason...Swordfish31 (talk) 07:21, 4 April 2023 (UTC) Swordfish31 (talk) 07:21, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

❌: contents are leading spoken languages as otherwise seen at Languages of Pakistan. Iseult  Δx parlez moi 22:42, 5 April 2023 (UTC)


 * The heading for the "contents" reads "provincial languages", not "leading spoken languages". If "provincial languages" are going to be included (which I do not think is an official term in the census of Pakistan) then Balochi must be included, as it would be the provincial language of Balochistan. Swordfish31 (talk) 02:56, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes. I do agree that the provincial languages section should be removed as it isn't that important on the main page because the languages are adopted by Provincial Legislatures for their respective provinces and not by the Central Parliament of Pakistan or the Government or the Constitution. So, it makes it a bit off with the context. Historianist01 (talk) 13:05, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Balochi must be added as a provincial language in the infobox
Balochi is the provincial language of Balochistan and should be included in the provincial languages. I don't know why it was excluded. Swordfish31 (talk) 02:26, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Paleolithic
You are adding back this edit without consensus.

Can you show some quality reliable sources which are detailing history of Pakistan and also mentioning Soanian culture? Having a paleolithic culture is not a big deal and they are found in many places. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 01:35, 8 April 2023 (UTC)


 * All sources discussing stone age of the region mention it. As its type site is in Soan valley, it can be included. Sutyarashi (talk) 06:00, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I asked for "quality reliable sources which are detailing history of Pakistan and also mentioning Soanian culture". First source is specifically about paleolithic settlements in Asia, while second source is self-published and unreliable. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 06:50, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Not as an "Ancient culture", but if it is added that Pakistan has been inhabited since the Paleolithic period (just like main articles on all other countries), I believe there should not be any problem with it. Sutyarashi (talk) 16:41, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
 * It is not a big deal to be "inhabited since Paleolithic period". It would need mention only if Paleolithic culture is actually relevant to the history of Pakistan but like I said, it will be decided by the quality reliable sources which are detailing history of Pakistan and making description of this Paleolithic culture. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 04:08, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
 * How can you say it is not relevant to the history of Pakistan when the Soanian culture's sites have been found across Pakistan and is named after the Soan Valley? Swordfish31 (talk) 02:32, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Here: A Brief History of Pakistan. P.13 mentions Soanians (and pre-Soanians). Iskandar323 (talk) 12:08, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
 * That provides description of, like I said, what was "inhabited since Paleolithic period". That is not a big deal. Infoboase Publishing is not reliable anyway.
 * It talks about "Roots of Civilization" in the next page but it does not mention Soanian culture at all there. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 05:08, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Any unreliability here appears to be your opinion. The sourcing stands. One WP:RSN discussion with bare minimum input and not close is not very informative. And there are others. But more generally, you are clearly only attacking the publisher of the valid source that has been provided because you do not like the contents. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:36, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 * No, there was a discussion which I have linked. I also stated that the source (even if it was reliable) still fails to satisfy the requirement. See Britannica page on Pakistan for a name. It mentions Indus valley civilization but not Soanian culture. As for what I "do not like", see WP:AGF. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 12:10, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 * There is no local consensus here for ignoring an Infobase Publishing work - if you want to challenge that work's usage here you need to take it up at WP:RSN, not rely on 2011 threads. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:34, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The source is not usable anyway because it does not substantiate information about Sonian culture as it substantiates Indus valley civilization with regards to Pakistan. I have started thread on WP:RSN about Infobase publishing. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 16:08, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Sattar Alvi in Military History - Proposed Change
Hey, I propose we change the "In the 1973 war, one of the PAF pilots, Flt. Lt. Sattar Alvi (flying a MiG-21), shot down an Israeli Air Force Mirage and was honoured by the Syrian government." To "According to modern Pakistani sources, in 1974, one of the PAF pilots, Flt. Lt. Sattar Alvi (flying a MiG-21), shot down an Israeli Air Force Mirage, killing the pilot, Captain M. Lutz. For this action, Alvi was honoured by the Syrian government. However, no major sources from the time reported on such an incident, and there is no mention of "Captain Lutz" in Israel's Ministry of Defense's record of Israel's casualties of war." This is in accordance to what is written in the Sattar Alvi article itself, where there are sources to back up the contrasting claims. Lainad27 (talk) 02:20, 15 April 2023 (UTC)


 * @ Aman.kumar.goel, @ نعم البدل , @ Sutyarashi . What do you think? Lainad27 (talk) 02:19, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes that sounds accurate. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 08:12, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose any changes. This much detail is undue in a country article. Oriental Aristocrat (talk) 12:06, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Would you suggest just deleting the mention of the pilot? or maybe just add to the current version "There is disagreement over the authenticity of this story."? The side that thinks differently needs to get a representation. Lainad27 (talk) 05:47, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 * @Lainad27 I agree with adding clarification for this statement. Sutyarashi (talk) 23:53, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 * @Oriental Aristocrat what do you think? Lainad27 (talk) 08:05, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * As Pakistan's role in the Yom Kippur War is already mentioned in an earlier sentence, I would rather agree to removing the mention of the pilot than add TOOMUCH detail. Oriental Aristocrat (talk) 08:40, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

National Slogan
I live in Pakistan, the slogan most commonly used is " Pakistan zindabad" which means "Long Live Pakistan" it should be added as the national slogan 202.69.43.2 (talk) 05:01, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 May 2023
Pakistan officially republic of Pakistan,country in Southasia. 103.134.3.78 (talk) 20:36, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: 'Islamic Republic of Pakistan' is correct, as it is what appears in all government documents. Tollens (talk) 20:46, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Current events
Can someone add a box current event to this page, as there are major clashes going on, media is talking about a civil war. 109.131.60.100 (talk) 16:28, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 May 2023
Sentences include a maximum penalty of ten years' imprisonment and a fine for same-sex activities between men 2001:1670:18:5736:382C:D5AD:C254:2934 (talk) 13:39, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ARandomName123 (talk) 15:57, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Census 2023
Pakistan population 246500000 punjab province 121215805 Sindh province 56566804 khyber Pukhtunkhwa province 39651697 Balochistan Province 20865000 39.33.241.107 (talk) 18:22, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Please provide source. Rasnaboy (talk) 05:05, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

The Biased Demographics Section
The demographics section in this page and its sub-section "Ethnicity and languages" seems biased and not in accordance to Wiki standards, in the sense that it only emphasizes about Pashto language, not having any status. As a whole, the statement is incorrect as Pashto has provincial status in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan. The statement in that regard has to be removed immediately as it undermines other communities of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. You can not mention all of them in that small space. UnionOfEditors (talk) 08:49, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 July 2023
The part where it says pakistan has the second highest muslim population is outdaded as it now has the most muslim population in the world, source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country#:~:text=As%20of%20June%202023%2C%20the,%2C%20and%20Bangladesh%20(150%2C800%2C000). 208.59.105.253 (talk) 06:01, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * IP user, you may not use Wikipedia by itself as a source, you have to at least cite what that article cites. For other editors, the attached citation is this Pakistan Today article. &#128156; melecie   talk  - 06:09, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

✅ Xan747 (talk) 16:16, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Pakistan population
Hello,

the population of Pakistan is not 249 million. Pakistan has a total population of 240.5 million according to the United Nations Population Fund, which may be found here: https://www.unfpa.org/data/world-population/PK

Please update. Thank you.

WikiAmerican1 (talk) 04:05, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Junagadh and Manavadar
The state of Junagadh was acceded to Pakistan in 1947 so Pakistan has the right to claim the territory of Junagadh as its own, please change the map. 39.55.218.19 (talk) 05:25, 18 June 2023 (UTC)


 * yes this must be done immediately. 2404:3100:180D:C51D:1:0:579A:67C9 (talk) 07:48, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Ridiculous sentence in the lead
The first lead paragraph states that Pakistan has the "world's first-largest Muslim population." which doesn't make any sense grammatically and factually.223.123.92.244 (talk) 11:12, 20 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Not first largest. You correct. But largest as of 2023 is correct. Fixed. --BeLucky (talk) 11:26, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

sport squash needed to be included.
missing squash in sports section in which Pakistan unmatchbly dominated globally. The Conquerror jahangir khan is legend and is considered as one of the top atheletes of 20th century. 182.182.35.18 (talk) 07:28, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 June 2023
89.101.103.130 (talk) 15:13, 20 June 2023 (UTC) To edit some grammar mistakes and outdared stuff
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 16:24, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Image addition
Can anyone tell me how to add images yo infobox settlement Jodiwise666 (talk) 09:37, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Update the Chief Justice post
Umar Ata Bandial has retired and has been succeeded by Qazi Faez Isa as the Chief Justice of Pakistan. Kindly update the post of the CJP. Knowledgepedian (talk) 16:16, 18 September 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅  Waqar 💬 20:44, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 October 2023
Change  to. Literally no one pronounces it ; in fact, [a] and [t] are rare in Urdu besides in diphthongs like [aɪ] and affricatives like [t͡ʃ]. ― Ö S M A N (talk · contribs) 04:41, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 05:19, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 October 2023 (2)
Pakistan: A Mosaic of Cultures and Landscapes Introduction

Emerging on the map of the world as an independent state on 14th August 1947, Pakistan has since evolved into a nation rich with culture, history, and geopolitical significance. Situated in South Asia, flanked by India, Afghanistan, Iran, China, and the Arabian Sea, Pakistan's strategic location makes it a confluence of diverse civilizations and traditions.

The Historical Canvas

Pakistan's history is an intricate tapestry woven over millennia. The ancient Indus Valley Civilization, one of the world's oldest, sprawled across what is present-day Sindh and Punjab. Centuries saw the region being trodden by Aryans, Persians, Greeks, Mauryans, Kushans, and the Islamic caliphates. These influences enriched the cultural, architectural, and spiritual identity of the region.

Geographical Splendor

From the snow-capped peaks of the Karakoram Range, including the majestic K2, to the deserts of Thar and Cholistan, and the lush plains of Punjab, Pakistan's topography is astoundingly diverse. This variety supports a rich biodiversity, from the snow leopards of Gilgit-Baltistan to the unique fauna of its southern coast.

Cultural Heritage and Languages

Pakistan is a cauldron of diverse ethnicities. Punjabis, Sindhis, Pashtuns, Baloch, and Mohajirs all contribute to the national tapestry. The rich linguistic palette includes Urdu, the national language, and regional tongues like Punjabi, Sindhi, Pashto, and Balochi. The mellifluous tunes of Qawwali, the intricate patterns of Truck Art, and the delectable flavors of foods like Biryani and Nihari reflect the country's cultural depth.

Religion and Spirituality

The spiritual ethos of Pakistan is predominantly Islamic, with a rich history of Sufism. Shrines of saints like Lal Shahbaz Qalandar and Data Ganj Bakhsh are not just religious sites, but also cultural hubs. While Islam is the state religion, the nation also houses Christian, Hindu, and other religious communities, symbolizing its diverse religious fabric.

Modern-Day Challenges and Achievements

Since its inception, Pakistan has witnessed a tumultuous political history. Democracies, military regimes, and socio-political movements have left indelible imprints on its fabric. Yet, amidst challenges, Pakistan has achieved significant milestones. From being a nuclear-armed state to producing world-renowned personalities like Malala Yousafzai and Abdul Sattar Edhi, the nation has showcased resilience and potential.

Conclusion

Pakistan, with its lush landscapes, rich history, and cultural diversity, stands as a testament to the resilience and spirit of its people. As it strides into the future, it carries the legacy of its past, embodying the dreams and aspirations of its founding fathers and reflecting the hopes of its vibrant youth. HassaanHassuni (talk) 10:09, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: The proposed text is written in the style of a tourist brochure, and is inappropriate for this encyclopaedia. CMD (talk) 10:19, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Dispute with India
Why does the map of Pakistan have a territorial claim in south Gujarat? I tried searching for anything about it but nothing. 2803:2A00:6:2D68:503C:416B:2392:DF48 (talk) 02:54, 11 October 2023 (UTC)


 * This relates to the Annexation of Junagadh, which Pakistan disputed. You can see the official Pakistan government map here. CMD (talk) 04:43, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 October 2023
Can you please add that Pakistan was also part of bactrian empire, the mongol empire. This history is relevant for the full context of the region 2603:8000:2C41:C000:514C:6243:7AE9:531C (talk) 02:56, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Please be specific (where do you want to add this and the exact text to be added). Please also provide reliable sources. RegentsPark (comment) 13:31, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 November 2023
Change the link attached to "Dominion status terminated" from Islamic republic to this ManU9827 (talk) 10:59, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ Elli (talk &#124; contribs) 22:49, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Muslim population
"It is the fifth-most populous country, with a population of over 241.5 million, having the largest Muslim population as of 2023."

Indonesia has the largest Muslim population, at more than 230 million. Pakistan's is just slightly over 200 million. 219.74.63.164 (talk) 16:07, 15 December 2023 (UTC)


 * I concur, this is true 49.36.123.246 (talk) 15:46, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Please correct the details
Hi dear! i have notice that driving side is written Left actually our driving side is Right hand in Pakistan. thank you. Best regard Zunair 2A02:C7C:5C40:9700:91AE:7D9A:653F:1C4E (talk) 15:03, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 January 2024
In the "Islamic Conquest" section, paragraph 2: change Lahore, Peshawar to Lahore, Peshawar Jblkby5594 (talk) 06:15, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Article is not too long
The article has the right length When the child has been good (talk) 18:53, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Imran Khan
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)

Role of Islam section
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)


 * 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. <b style="color: blue;">Sh</b><b style="color: red;">eri</b><b style="color: blue;">ff</b> &#124; <b style="color: black;">☎ 911</b> &#124; 21:33, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Image
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)


 * 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. <b style="color: blue;">Sh</b><b style="color: red;">eri</b><b style="color: blue;">ff</b> &#124; <b style="color: black;">☎ 911</b> &#124; 16:06, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Then I am open to changing caption.
 * "Sir Syed Ahmed Khān, was a major personality shaping both, the Muslim identity and the Urdu language."
 * "Slowly a national Muslim identity emerged, championed by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan (1817-98)."
 * "Sir Syed urged the need to preserve a separate Muslim identity, both culturally and politcally and feared a political alliance with the Hindus."
 * 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)
 * 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. <b style="color: blue;">Sh</b><b style="color: red;">eri</b><b style="color: blue;">ff</b> &#124; <b style="color: black;">☎ 911</b> &#124; 21:17, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

"Unparalleled" mass migration and loss of life
"...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)
 * "Unprecedented" would be the correct term as per the main article. Capitals00 (talk) 09:12, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

HM
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"? 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)


 * 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. <b style="color: blue;">Sh</b><b style="color: red;">eri</b><b style="color: blue;">ff</b> &#124; <b style="color: black;">☎ 911</b> &#124; 17:29, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * 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)
 * That could be just considered WP:FRINGE. <b style="color: blue;">Sh</b><b style="color: red;">eri</b><b style="color: blue;">ff</b> &#124; <b style="color: black;">☎ 911</b> &#124; 17:52, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * These sources cannot be termed as "fringe":
 * Capitals00 (talk) 18:06, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I am not contesting Savarkar proposing two-nation theory before Jinnah, I am contesting Savarkar and his theory's relationship with creation of Pakistan. <b style="color: blue;">Sh</b><b style="color: red;">eri</b><b style="color: blue;">ff</b> &#124; <b style="color: black;">☎ 911</b> &#124; 19:07, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * 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)
 * 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. <b style="color: blue;">Sh</b><b style="color: red;">eri</b><b style="color: blue;">ff</b> &#124; <b style="color: black;">☎ 911</b> &#124; 17:32, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
 * 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 section which is mostly unnecessary. Srijanx22 (talk)  18:05, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
 * 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. <b style="color: blue;">Sh</b><b style="color: red;">eri</b><b style="color: blue;">ff</b> &#124; <b style="color: black;">☎ 911</b> &#124; 18:24, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
 * 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)
 * Simply suggesting that a two-nation theory predates Jinnah's theory does not inherently imply a direct correlation between them. <b style="color: blue;">Sh</b><b style="color: red;">eri</b><b style="color: blue;">ff</b> &#124; <b style="color: black;">☎ 911</b> &#124; 19:37, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
 * 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)
 * 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 section which is mostly unnecessary. Srijanx22 (talk)  18:05, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
 * 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. <b style="color: blue;">Sh</b><b style="color: red;">eri</b><b style="color: blue;">ff</b> &#124; <b style="color: black;">☎ 911</b> &#124; 18:24, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
 * 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)
 * Simply suggesting that a two-nation theory predates Jinnah's theory does not inherently imply a direct correlation between them. <b style="color: blue;">Sh</b><b style="color: red;">eri</b><b style="color: blue;">ff</b> &#124; <b style="color: black;">☎ 911</b> &#124; 19:37, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
 * 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)

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. <b style="color: blue;">Sh</b><b style="color: red;">eri</b><b style="color: blue;">ff</b> &#124; <b style="color: black;">☎ 911</b> &#124; 05:10, 9 March 2024 (UTC)


 * 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)

President
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)