Peshawar was a Geography and places good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result December 18, 2006 Good article nominee Not listed
	A news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on July 13, 2018.

This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Cities This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles Pakistan: Cities High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Pakistani cities.

To-do list for Peshawar: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2009-11-26 Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Expand : the acquisition of the area by the British and its governance need more info Verify : more inline citations needed to cover all significant points

The picture of the Khyber Pass is misleading. The Pass is not in peshawar and would be appropriate for an article on FATA or NWFP.

Can you get a hold of a more appropriate free picture? Donama 23:24, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the criticism of Khyber Pass picture. I will try to get some good free pictures.

I have moved the Khyber Pass image down to a more appropriate section and have changed the image to the Islamia College. I have made more improvments to the articles to make it more inline with the Lahore and Karachi articles. Let me know of your comments. Thanks Fast track 00:32 06 July 06 (UTC)

FATA does not exist anymore, Khyber Pass is a part of KP now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.36.96.200 (talk) 18:07, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just like to put in a request for more better quality images of Peshawar to Wikipedia Commons, so they can be added to this article and Peshawar related articles. Thanks Fast track 00:36 06 July 2006 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

5. It is stable.

   

6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

   a (tagged and captioned): b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):

7. Overall:

   a Pass/Fail:

I am keeping this article on hold for seven days. If enough inline citations are introduced in that time, it will easily pass as a good article. -Runningonbrains 12:40, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article fails criterion 2b: Inline references and citations. However, overall, this is an excellent article, and once inline citations are introduced, I would suggest re-nominating. In my opinion, it should then pass easily. -Runningonbrains 14:18, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm inclined to disagree- at least at this time.

• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links), I believe some sections (Educational institutions & Sites of interest) are over-linked.
• Sites of interest also provides little extra content and context other than an excessive & unhelpful list.
• The History section is (without subsections) too long and needs breaking down in to eras or associated timeframes.
• Per WP:LEAD, the opening section at one paragraph is too short.
• Many statements would benefit from having their sources directly cited; whilst there is a large References list, comments from these sources would be better used in the Footnotes section.
  • For example, "It has been argued that an ancient city named Pushkalwati, founded by Bharat's son Pushkal, may have existed in this general area during ancient Indian times before the Persian invasion of the Indian subcontinent." - needs directly referencing.
  • The Demographics section has many facts and figures but the exact source is unknown to the user in the present condition.
  • The References section currently acts more like a Further reading section without their use in the text being more closely defined.

Should these be met, I believe the article would be a VERY GOOD ARTICLE. Hope that helps, Jhamez84 01:07, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As part of GA, you may wish to visit Wikipedia:Peer review for further suggestions. Jhamez84 01:13, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to include the FACT that peshawar was once Afghanistans land 99 years ago. Afghanistan had a contract signed with Britain that it would be Pakistans for 92 years and that mark has passed. The pakis know that Afghanistan can not take the land back until they are settled in as a country so Pakistan is trying to mess that up by sending suicide bombers in saying its Al Qaeda and all. Peshawar is Afghan land and they have every right to say they are Afghan! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.75.39.15 (talk) 01:20, 8 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Dude 92 years back Pakistan even didn't existed, and no one knew that a country named Pakistan will come into being. You are talking of 1915 probably! and the name Pakistan came into being in 1934 and the country in 1947. --SMS ^Talk 20:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to above: The agreement the above writer mentions did not have an expiry clause and Peshawar is owned by the folks who lived there, not some afghan king. Peshawar is a Pakistani and Pakhtun city.

I just finished wikifying Peshawar Development Authority. I was wondering if it would be appropriate to merge that article into this one, as it is short. But I do not see a "government" section in this article, which would seem like the best place to put that information. Not knowing anything about Peshawar, I'm asking you folks: would it make sense to have a "government" section in this article? Or does Peshawar not have a goverment? Is the Development Authority part of it? Thanks, --Alynna 18:32, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a link to the City District Government Website: http://cdgpeshawar.gov.pk/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.36.96.200 (talk) 18:11, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Both the infobox and the {{Geolinks-cityscale}} template are placing coordinates at the upper right of the article, and they are on top of each other. Is there a good way to only have one of them do this? --Alynna 23:35, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have thought about this for a while and consulthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peshawar Articleed a native speaker of Persian and we can't figure it out. If you take it as پیشاور "pish" is evident as "next to".

Another possibility is to take پی as foot and شاور as 'end, extremity' (from Steingass dictionary); 'at the foot of the border'. This is supported by transliterations such as Paishawur found in gazeteers from the 1820s.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Millercor (talk • contribs) 18:19, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply] 

The statement about what it means in Persian is very vague and unreferenced. I have replaced it with a reference from the NWFP government about the origins of the name. Green Giant (talk) 23:59, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It actually means 'high fort' and dates from the Mughal period, at least in terms of verifiable name usage. The majority of the locals however don't even call it Peshawar, but rather Pekhawar. The only thing that is known is that the city was Begram and renamed Peshawar by Akbar during the conflicts with Safavids in particular and was set up a fort to confront the Persian threat as it were since Kabul and Kandahar constantly switched hands. I can get some references to this at some point when I'm done with classes this week to help this article. The theory on it having a contiguous existence since the Kushan period is just that, a theory, not unlike the Pashtuns being the Pactyans and Pakhats etc. No on really knows if the city gets its name from the Kushans. All we do know is that the Mughals MAY have simply used a name that was a close approximation and also meant something in their Persian tongue. It is interesting that the NWFP govt. thinks its name is derived from Purushpura (I saw that myself a while back), but really need academic references instead and since the only written accounts of literal use of the name Peshawar comes from the Mughal period, that's all we have. And we really need to mention what the locals call it, even if the govt. (which takes its cues from Islamabad) wants to avoid patronizing local language use in order to homogenize the country. Tombseye (talk) 23:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you mean "hypothesis" rather than "theory" Tombseye. And yes, Peshawar means "High Fort". I wouldn't be surprised if "Purushapura" is an ancestor term to "Peshawar" but I need hard evidence. The Pathans didn't exist in what is now NWFP around the time of the Kushans, it was mostly populated by people of the Gandhari culture. I think Pathans came from what was then called "Arachosia" but is now the area between Kandahar and Quetta. So they wouldn't have had anything to do with the original naming or culture of the city at the time.- User: Afghan Historian.

This article has several non working citation links viz:

• 4 Peshawar - History
• 7^ Buddhist Past By Fidaullah Sehrai
• 8^ of Peshawar By Asghar Javed
• 15^ History of Peshawar By Asghar Jaaved August 6, 2007 Monday
• 17^ History of Peshawar By Asghar Jaaved August 6, 2007 Monday

Are these messed up deliberately by a vandal ??? Would be good to see fix them . Cheers
Intothefire (talk) 12:24, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a very informative page but I have an issue with information provided in the Tourist Information section.

The old walled city of Peshawar had 16 gates but only 15 gates are mentioned in the section. Other sources list the following 16 named gates:

Bajauri, Ramdas, Bariskian, Sardchah, Sarki, Kohati, Yakatoot, Gang, Lahori, Hashtnagri, Rampura, Rati, Kachari, Andarsher, Kabuli, and Debgari

While the two lists have some differences in spelling, the list above contains gate names, like Rati and Andarsher, that do not appear on this Wikipedia page.

C2Pro (talk) 15:58, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image File:100px-Pk-punj.PNG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:18, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fateh!

Well, regarding this quote:

In regards to Sikh rule in Peshawar, the British noted:

" Of the monuments of the Muslim period, too very few have survived our own times, not because the Muslim kings were not endowed with architectural tastes and talents or that they did not construct any attractive edifices, but because everything of architectural value that existed here was destroyed by the Sikhs, especially during Avitabile's reign as the Governor of Peshawar. The only buildings of any antiquity and historical interest are the Gor Khatri, also called Serai Jahanabad, and the Mosque of Mahabat Khan. Even these did not escape the tyrant's hand, while the mosque was desecrated and its lofty minars were used as gallows, the Serai was converted into the residence of the governor, and the mosque of Jahan Ara Begum built inside was replaced by a temple, which still stands there.[34] "

Look at the source in footnote 35. The above paragraph has just been lifted from the very biased review of the book the reviewer is discussing. It says nothing about the British saying that, it is the author of the review, Syed Mohammad Tahir, who is saying it. If you read the rest of his review and you can see the bias in favour of the Moghuls.

I wouldn't be surprised if the rest of the sources are misrepresented as well.

*Fateh!

• OK, I'm going to check through each of the sources mentioned. I'll come back and edit this when time permits until I have done all of them.

• Source 21. It points to an encyclopaedia of Naples. Presumably the author of the article wants us to read the bit about Abu Tabela (Avitabile). Well, this source says the following about Maharaja Ranjit Singh:

• "One of the stories they tell about Singh is that despite his many conquests, he did not allow wanton destruction of life or property, and that throughout his life he never passed a sentence of death. "

• Regarding Avitabile, he says:

• "Avitabile quickly earned the reputation of being a bloodthirsty and ruthless enforcer of Sikh authority. Every morning, they say, Avitabile would have a few Muslims thrown to their deaths from a minaret just as a warning to the locals. He meted out absolutely gruesome "justice" as governor of Peshawar, something that no doubt helped to drive the population away from the city; the population of Peshawar was reduced by half in the years of Sikh rule. "

• It's clear this is hearsay. The author mentions no historical sources to support this. Even if Avitabile was a sadist, he was a Christian not a Sikh, and to blame his excesses on Ranjit Singh is pretty silly.

• Source 22. Is from pakistanpaedia, another wiki that claims that the population of Peshawar was halved, but provides no sources. So basically the proof of this assertion is that some other guy said it first.

• Source 23 and 24. Both point to the same news article by the same author, who is a Pakistani politician, who makes the claim that this mosque was destroyed and replaced with the Goraknath temple, but he doesn't give any reference to historical texts to prove this. Pretty much hearsay again. Besides, why would Sikhs build a Hindu temple?

• Source 25. An article blogged by a Pakistani author who says that this mosque was the only one that survived the depredations of the Sikhs. He cites no historical source, so again its hearsay. This author even points out that the legendary cruelty of Avitabile is unconfirmed, especially the legend of his using the minarets as gallows.

• Source 26. A Sikh History article on Hari Singh Nalwa. It says he never destroyed any mosques. :-)

• Source 27. A paragraph on the Muhabat Khan mosque by an anonymous author who says the same thing about Avitabile using the minarets as gallows. No historical source cited. But the author put this sentence in quote marks, so it must be true - right? Um, no. There is no mention of the minarets being destroyed by the Sikhs and being rebuilt by the British.

• Source 28. A paragraph about Avitabile from the Sikh Encyclopedia which mentions the same rumours about Avitabile's rule of Peshawar being described as one of "gallows and gibbets". There are sources here, yay! Alas, none mention where this description originated and whether there was any truth to the rumours.

• Source 29. From a page on the Engineering University of Peshawar. It is the same as one of the earlier source. There is no mention of Avitabile. Repetitious and irrelevant.

• Source 30. Exactly the same as source 27. Repetition. Maybe saying it twice will make it true?

• Source 31. This is an article written by a travel journalist. It mentions the same claims regarding the minarets, but it does not claim to be based on anything but the journalists knowledge of Peshawar, and of course therefore there is no historical text referenced to verify this rumour.

• Source 32. Exactly the same as source 26. Repetition.

• Source 33. A paragraph from a tourism guide. The actual line here that the author of this article is probably referring to is this one: "A guide told us that during the Sikh-period, the minarets were used a lot as gallows." So an old illiterate peasants words constitutes historical prrof, I guess.

• The authors in his next sentence after citing these sources claims that "the desecration of Peshawar's mosques by their [the Sikh's] appointed administrator is well documented," which might be true, but this article certainly proves no such thing.

• Sources 34 and 35 and 36 (which is the same as 35). These I have discussed above. The Sikhs may have destroyed the Shalimar gardens for firewood (I suppose the author would prefer the Sikhs to perish in the cold?), but these sources do not offer any evidence to support the claim. The Columbia Encyclopaedia claims that Bala Hisar fort was still being used as military headquarters in the 21st century so the claim that it was destroyed by the Sikhs is likely false. What is definite is that the authors cited source certainly doesn't substantiate his claim.

• If this guy had handed in this essay at university to be marked, it would have been thrown back in his face.

Take care, Sunnybondsinghjalwehra (talk) 11:14, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry that you are at odds with reality. Pre-Sikh Peshawar was call the City of Flowers, with gardens visible from the Balahisar fort. After the Sikhs, it is as barren as any other sub-continental city, and didn't recover under the British. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.44.50.173 (talk) 02:06, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The population is listed as 36,25,000. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.27.75.33 (talk) 05:18, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The footnoted reference for the population world gazetteer, shows a number nothing like what is listed. Jackbrown — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackbrown (talk • contribs) 15:22, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An image used in this article, File:Map walledcity.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:44, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have completed a review of the entire article and have left tags at the top of the page that I believe continue to be relevant. Sections of the article had obviously been lifted out of a tourism resource and the page's second half read more like a travel website, rather than an encyclopedia article. The historical section that begins the article is sound, but requires further citations. As I have mentioned in another Talk contribution, reliable data can be difficult to find on Peshawar if one is using only the Internet like me, but I am certain that other types of resources will uncover the necessary content. As the city continues to exist in a salient region of the world, in terms of politics, trade and religion, I highly recommend that copyeditors prioritise this article and others like it. Thanks.--Soulparadox (talk) 14:15, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As part of an overall review of this article, I have removed this sentence: "although, since 2010, Kabul's Pashtun population is larger", as I am unable to find a reference for this anywhere. The entire article requires further verification, as can be seen from the tag that I inserted, but if anyone can verify this statement, then I have no problem reverting the edit.--Soulparadox (talk) 12:13, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen, through my Internet-based searches, that it is difficult to find up-to-date information and data about Peshawar, but hopefully there are copyeditors out there who may be able to access content that is limited or contained in hard copy form. On a side note, I have found the city to be fascinating, based on its history alone, so I hope that there are other copyeditors out there willing to refine this article to the greatest degree possible. Thanks.--Soulparadox (talk) 12:16, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thought you would want to be correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.57.214.125 (talk) 19:50, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content. Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 13:21, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

pashto is the official language of peshawer, khyberpakthunkhwa not any punjabi(saraiki, hindko) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.83.86.156 (talk) 07:13, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I want to edit please allow me Salmam Khan (talk) 03:08, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Salmam Khan: See WP:AUTOCONFIRM. Your user account must be more than four days old and have made at least 10 edits. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:10, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Peshawar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100613053333/http://www.pakmet.com.pk:80/cdpc/Climate/Peshawar_Climate_Data.txt to http://www.pakmet.com.pk/cdpc/Climate/Peshawar_Climate_Data.txt
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100820185911/http://www.pakmet.com.pk:80/FFD/index_files/rainfalljuly10.htm to http://www.pakmet.com.pk/FFD/index_files/rainfalljuly10.htm

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

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

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:30, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Within the "Demographics"-section, the same source (https://hassanyarkhan.wordpress.com/a-visit-to-a-peshawar/) is cited twice for the same claim (The "Majority of the city residents speak Pashto"-claim). Isn't that redundant? Shouldn't one of them be removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.111.69.45 (talk) 18:40, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a reliable source so I have removed it. --SMS ^Talk 22:23, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Peshawar. 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.pakmet.com.pk:80/cdpc/Climate/Peshawar_Climate_Data.txt
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.pakmet.com.pk:80/FFD/index_files/rainfalljuly10.htm

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

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

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:12, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is an error in the Peshawar climate data :

according to the original source, ftp://ftp.atdd.noaa.gov/pub/GCOS/WMO-Normals/RA-II/PK/41530.TXT, the average low temperature in November is 9.6 °C and not 7.6 °C as displayed in the article.

Could anyone explain to me how to change 7.6 into 9.6 in the climate data table ? Carlo Colussi (talk) 18:31, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

QUOTE: Peshawar was not affected by the widespread devastation that was experienced throughout the rest of British India END OF QUOTE.

The person who wrote this nonsense seems to think that the subcontinent was confined to Delhi and thereabouts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:D007:B474:642F:8074:D407:4072 (talk) 01:42, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Peshawar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130425183548/http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=750961 to http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=750961
• Added archive https://archive.is/20130411112422/http://www.newslinemagazine.com/2008/10/the-frontier-singhs/ to http://www.newslinemagazine.com/2008/10/the-frontier-singhs/

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

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

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:14, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Peshawar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160131042427/http://pakhtunkhwa.com/html/body_nwfp_in_search_of_a_name.html to http://pakhtunkhwa.com/html/body_nwfp_in_search_of_a_name.html

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

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

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:24, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If the readings shown here are accurate, Peshawar recorded a rainfall total of 468 mm on on the 1st November 2018, which smashes the old 24 hour record;

https://www.ogimet.com/cgi-bin/gsynres?lang=en&ind=41529&ano=2018&mes=11&day=1&hora=19&min=0&ndays=7

I say "if" because I have so far been unable to find any conformation for this extraordinary figure.

Meltingpot (talk) 20:05, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging User:Headbomb and User:Lewanayspay.

I was going through Special:PendingChanges and came across several consecutive edits to this page by User:Lewanayspay. I did not accept the latest of their edits because it removed a statement about the region's former name which is apparently backed up by a reliable source. However, the first two edits to the article by User:Lewanayspay were automatically accepted, and all subsequent edits starting from the edit with the summary reverting back to previous status before another user bulldozed nuance in order to push his preferred nationalist version that removed relevant facts like: the name pushapura didn’t exist in any earlier sources than the 7th century AD, the Purusha king is not found in any ancient record were not. I can only assume that User:Lewanayspay is referring to the editor who most recently edited the page, with an edit with the summary -predatory source, and it appears this is a BRD case.

Therefore I'm starting this discussion on the talk page to allow consensus to be gained on what content relevant to these edits should be kept or removed. Please note I have restored the "pre-dispute" version of the page.

Many thanks,

SITH (talk) 16:13, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I got no opinion on the general edits, but Serials Publications is a predatory publisher, and is not a WP:RS, so should not be used to support anything. I've re-removed that source. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:18, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Headbomb. Lewanayspay, on closer analysis it does appear that Headbomb's edit is supported by our policies on reliable sources, is the issue you mentioned in your edit summary regarding another user's edits? SITH (talk) 16:32, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@StraussInTheHouse: Those weren’t the edits I was referring to. I was referring to a series of edits in September by user Anupam who drastically changed what was written to make it seem like the etymology of Peshawar is black and white, when it actually is not so clear cut and there are several competing theories. The claims he makes aren’t even in the sources he cited and he uses sources that aren’t etymological studies like his source about jihadism in the 20th century that mentions the Purushapura name only in passing- is that really a scholarly source for this topic? Important and sourced information about the supposedly ancient name not appearing anywhere before the 7th century were simply removed by him. This was from a book that was written specifically to deal with the origin of Peshawar’s name. That book also noted that the Purushapura name is “taken for granted” - he removed this direct quote in his edits to make it appear that the Purushapura explanation has no problems with it and is universally accepted.

He also changed the “founding” section to remove the cited content about Peshawar being established in the cultural sphere of ancient eastern Persia, and changed it to say that Peshawar was founded and an ancient Indian city in the 1st century in the cultural sphere of ancient India. He also added a map in which he again talks about ancient India,and another sentence in the intro about ancient India.

I think the version as it is now preserves what is obviously a very biased reading that “overly Indianizes” the city’s history. My edits were much more nuanced and neutral. I never erased the Purushapura theory - just added references about it being disputed and why it is so. In fact, I accurately wrote that the origin of Peshawar’s name is “widely attributed” to the ancient Sanskrit name Purushapura bc that’s a fact. But it’s also a fact that The word Purushapura doesn’t exist in literature until almost 1200 years after Peshawar was founded. So we dont know what the ancient name of Peshawar was.

And in the introduction, he uses 3 sources for his claim that “Peshawar was called Purushapura in the ancient Indian subcontinent” when none of those sources actually say Peshawar was *called* that. It may have been called that - but Purushapura wasn’t in any text prior to the 7th century, and earlier sources called Peshawar by different names like Fu-lu-sha or Poshpura. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lewanayspay (talk • contribs) 20:28, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think Lewanayspay's edits are problematic because they try to push undue competing theories when most scholarly publications support the fact that Peshawar was founded as Purushapura in ancient India. --RaviC (talk) 21:17, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Two of the five letters in پېښور aren't in most Nastaliq fonts, most of the Pashto alphabet isn't.

Most of the fonts the {{nq}} and {{nastaliq}} templates use include just Urdu and sometimes a couple of varieties of Punjabi. About a third of the Pashto alphabet displays as nonsense characters.

Why do people keep using these templates on Pashto and other languages? Do they have an unusually comprehensive Nastaliq font on their own device that makes it work? or do they have none of the fonts on their device and just add the Nastaliq templates for consistency without knowing what they do?

Irtapil (talk) 14:13, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That explains it a bit, it seems the name in Pashto was updated (4 October 2018) when {{nq}} was already there. [1] and [2].

The first is labelled as "From the Pashto Wikipedia." 22:33, 24 September 2018‎ user:CentreLeftRight. So maybe they didn't see it didn't display right? @CentreLeftRight:?

Previously @Abrm Khan: added a different name, "I corrected the name of Peshawar city in Pashto langugage , they wrote پشور well its actually called پيخاور in pashto." 12:38, 24 September 2018‎.

BBC Pashto agrees with the current name i think? [3]

Irtapil (talk) 20:41, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I copied the name straight from the Pashto Wikipedia. I don't speak Pashto so if you notice a mistake, you're probably right. CentreLeftRight ✉ 23:54, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

assalamualaikum g ma din kalioya jara ha hu is ka bad januare pe ajana lahor — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.103.104.110 (talk) 11:28, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bawal 39.50.211.151 (talk) 23:36, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Peshawar Museum 3.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:07, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There was a recent terror attack in Peshawar. Can someone use 2023 Peshawar mosque bombing as a source and edit in the article? 216.107.236.98 (talk) 12:32, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The number presented in this line of text is wrong: "In January 2023, another terrorist attack occurred at Peshawar in which 83 people were killed."

The 83 in this sentence is outdated, it should be 101.

Sources: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/1/31/pakistan-rescue-operation-peshawar-mosque-suicide-bombing And in the dedicated page for the bombing incident it also says 101: https://teknopedia.ac.id/wiki/2023_Peshawar_mosque_bombing Rafnus (talk) 10:32, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Al Jazeera mentions 100 killed (excluding the perpetrator that I didn't mention). M.Bitton (talk) 18:54, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Ahsan R1 (talk) 08:15, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 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. Liu1126 (talk) 11:11, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]