Talk:Abbottabad

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Can someone change the name of the mayor? Its incorrect. The current mayor of Abbottabad city is Sardar Shujah Nabi. Not Waqar Nabi. Thanks. 

https://dailytimes.com.pk/912257/pti-claims-tehsil-mayor-abbottabad-slot/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.177.128.145 (talk) 21:02, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

History[edit]

In this city there is a Rock Edict of Emperror Ashoka. I think this has to be mentioned in History of this town. The history should not begin just with Major Abbott only. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.163.96.66 (talk) 17:07, 3 May 2011‎ (UTC)[reply]

Unsorted text[edit]

Population of the City and District separately mention on the page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.56.12.124 (talk) 07:10, 18 April 2007‎ (UTC)[reply]

City table[edit]

I added the city table, but am having trouble editing it. Could someone please help me? Thanks a lot. We could incorperate this setup into all of the city pages! -Bk2006, 11:50, July 18, 2007 (UTC)

City / district confusion[edit]

The article confuses the city with the district, which is a separate article: Abbottabad district. For example, the population of 881,000 in the infobox is for the district, and the 'demographics' section relates to the district! Midnight Madness (talk) 12:58, 10 June 2008 (UTC) Now The population Abbottabad is 5,90,000 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.82.61.43 (talk) 10:54, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:100px-Pk-punj.PNG[edit]

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]

List of notable people[edit]

It should be limited to people who are notable enough to have their own article. The notability guideline is WP:PEOPLE. People who don't appear to be notable will be removed at sight. --Enric Naval (talk) 22:54, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bin Laden[edit]

Should information be added on Osama Bin Laden's death? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.131.122.31 (talk) 03:41, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since this town was keeping him safe for half a decade, yes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.102.171.147 (talk) 03:43, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agree that it should be mentioned here. However it also should be added that it was a joint operation between CIA and ISI, not just American's special forces. Credit should be put where is due. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edelrc (talk • contribs) 06:27, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely add. The gunning down of Osama bin Laden was an historic event. It's appropriate to add a mention of it, at least in the overview section. 93.172.36.181 (talk) 00:42, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow that was quick. Obama still was speaking —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.175.43.164 (talk) 03:45, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Its absolutely ridiculous that mention of bin laden has been appended to the overview. A current events item doesn't define an entire city with centuries of history! Remove it at once. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.163.203.158 (talk) 12:45, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the current event is an historical one. News of it including the name of Abbottabad reached literally billions of people. From now on to most people, Abbottabad would be known as the placed where bin Laden hid for many years and ultimately was gunned down. It is therefore important to mention it. 93.172.36.181 (talk) 00:39, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

only if Dallas talk about being the home of JFK killing —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.151.0.13 (talk) 21:24, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes comrade, I see parallels here. Christian killing Christian and Muslim killing Muslim, haha. 99.148.201.12 (talk) 15:31, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the tweeter Sohaib Athar mentioned in this article? He is irrelevant to this article and should not be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.173.28.122 (talk) 23:06, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We would like to add Osama bin laden's death in this town as trivia, maybe as a fun fact if you really do not mind the euphorism intended by that statement on the contrary. I agree that one current affairs issue doe not define a town, but it would be very unust to exclude the town's involvement in such intriguing international affairs. Maybe a link to the main article about the US operation (was the ISI involved? i do not think so.... I know that because the ISI was not informed last night) and we must have the monk mentioned. Please let me know if the tweeter can also be included since this was an unusual incident concerning the compound and not infringing on any copyright. Thank you. I await your consensus on this issue. Harvardoxford (talk) 17:05, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harvardoxford (talk · contribs) is a vandal/troll who is making nonsensical edits on various Wikipedia pages. I have already left a few warnings and will leave another one about this post. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:00, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation[edit]

This needs disambiguation, a hatnote should be added 65.93.12.8 (talk) 04:59, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done Qwyrxian (talk) 06:58, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from 99.17.229.253, 2 May 2011[edit]

Please correct the distance referenced in the second sentence from "150km" to "50km" (north of Islamabad). I noticed this error by using Google Maps.

99.17.229.253 (talk) 05:16, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Already done Qwyrxian (talk) 06:58, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Picture[edit]

Picture Abbottabad View.JPG can be found twice in the article. --Einpaarcent (talk) 10:02, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed - Pointillist (talk) 10:38, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Location of Bin Laden's compound?[edit]

The transcript says "compound in Abbottabad" but doesn't make it clear whether the city of Abbottabad is intended or somewhere else in Abbottabad District. The Guardian report says Bin Laden's compound was in a nearby town called Kakul. - Pointillist (talk) 10:44, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In Death of Osama bin Laden it is described as being on the PMA Kakul road, a house five times larger than others in the neighborhood, highest on a hill. Here it is. Erxnmedia (talk) 13:08, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If the Telegraph's location (here) is accurate, then the compound was in the town of Kakul, not the city of Abbottabad. This BBC map shows the difference. It's a bit like confusing New York City with Poughkeepsie because they are both in the State of New York. - Pointillist (talk) 15:24, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a bit confused. I have seen those images listed on several news sites, but ABCNews reported that THIS is the place. While it doesn't actually match up with some of the other news services, but matches the description made. --Hourick (talk) 16:40, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
CNN is reporting this is the location on its front page. I wish this gets cleared up quickly. --Hourick (talk) 17:29, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed, at the locationthe in article now....See BBC, NY Times maps, images in addition to the CNN one above. Most of the early general public postings of sites on Google Maps were way off.DLinth (talk) 19:35, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bin Ladin death in main paragraph[edit]

I don't think it would be appropriate to list the death at the beginning of the article, even though I am absolutely ecstatic about the whole thing, but perhaps in a "notable history" section there.

Additionally, I'm going to request a vandalism protection on this page until this dies down a bit. --Hourick (talk) 15:10, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct: articles are encyclopedic, not outlets for current events. Mention of OBL in the lede should be removed, and reduced in the text to a single line. TechBear | Talk | Contributions 21:04, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I also agree that it doesn't belong in the lead. I can't think of any other instances where it's mentioned in a city's lead that it's most notable for the death of an individual. It already gets prominent mention in the history section which is enough. OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:05, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What are your thoughts about removing the entire section on OBL? I don't see that as necessary either. TechBear | Talk | Contributions 21:11, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ah...I suspect you'd get a lot of pushback on that from the community. It is a significant historic event, so it would seem to make sense to at least mention it and link to the main article about the event from here. It certainly doesn't need a lot of coverage and detail here. OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:18, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree about a mention; I disagree that it belongs in a section all on its own. This is a current event, and current events do not belong in articles. TechBear | Talk | Contributions 21:35, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree it should be mentioned in the overview section. It's not just recent news or a death of some guy. It is an historic event and it was the reason billions of people heard of this city. I think a simple line with a link to the Death of Osama bin Laden is appropriate. The article is protected. Can someone with an account add this? 93.172.36.181 (talk) 00:49, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK by me. It's arguably recentism that resulted in it having it's own section. OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:45, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's true that this is a hot issue right now, but pretending that it has cooled off I think the lead is actually the place to mention and link to Death of Osama bin Laden, as it belongs to the lead to brief the reader on the article's scope, which to the reader means the subject's scope (best example I could think of is Campoformido). The subsection at History does feel appropriate if we consider the section as responsible to give an account of the events that the place is linked to, so it bears mention, but at the same time I think that not much if anything of the event has, or hasn't yet, affected the place itself as in, say, New_York_City#History, where 9/11 is major than the city (or well, separate), but the event also touched the city, and this gets reflected on the information about rebuilding the city, and the rest goes to the event's article. The subsection here, though short, is actually very verbose about something that is for most accounts unrelated to the town. Maybe the subsection could contain but the main article link, or no subsection but the link at the end of History in one sentence at most. About being an event, I agree that it is not convenient to have the articles become a dump of data from ongoing issues, especially when is something so stirred up, but some of that data is immutable and it can be safely introduced - frankieMR (talk) 23:08, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I will keep an eye on this article in the future and eventually prune down the OBL section. The section is currently getting a bit out of hand, but there is no point of pushing back the ocean with a broom. A brief mention of the area and a link to the articles should be sufficient on the matter. The only thing I suggest is try to keep it as small as possible so it doesn't overwhelm this article. I do find it humorous though that the tin foil hat wearers haven't descended on this page, though. --Hourick (talk) 22:38, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think Hourick's idea is good. The amount of information about the death of Osama bin Laden, while perhaps understandable at this stage, is excessive in this article, especially when there is an article about that very subject. I'd also hazard a guess that people who look up this article, even if prompted to do so by the death, are looking at it to find out about Abbottabad itself; if they primarily wanted information about bin Laden's death they would look elsewhere. Clearly the death deserves a mention here: it is after all an historical event that occurred in Abbottabad, but a line with a link is (ultimately) enough. The only caveat to that might be if (in the fullness of time) it is possible to put in information about the response of the town or its people to the event, or if the event has some sort of medium- or long-term effect on the town – but it's too soon to know that yet. Ondewelle (talk) 06:40, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, Abbottabad is a city with hundreds of years of history. This article is about the city, not Osama bin Laden. A few sentences on OBL should be more than sufficient. 99.148.201.12 (talk) 15:30, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad that cooler heads seemed to have prevailed. The only link I will have to OBL (may he rot in hell), is putting it as a category. The reason for this is that he had a definite link here (by living here), but also to make it easier for anyone to simply click on the category and bring up all things OBL. If anyone has an objection to that, please talk it out on here. --Hourick (talk) 23:45, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is inappropriate. According to WP:Categorization, "Categorize articles by characteristics of the topic, not characteristics of the article". So, it is appropriate that the article Location of Osama bin Laden be a subcategory of Category:Osama bin Laden and Category:Abbottabad District, but Abbottabad is not part of Osama bin Laden. Abductive (reasoning) 00:10, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Population[edit]

How am I supposed to interpret the "Population" section of the infobox? For the record, the body of the article gives an entirely different figure. Zagalejo^^^ 04:35, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the data refer to Abbottabad District rather than the city of Abbottabad (this article). - Pointillist (talk) 12:18, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
So, which of the three figures should we use? What's a good source for these figures? Zagalejo^^^ 22:30, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless, they are out of date now, subtract one from whichever you choose. Rich Farmbrough, 09:27, 10 May 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Pronounciation[edit]

Anyone care to opine on the pronounciation of "Abbottabad"? It's already been noted the place was named for a British officer named Abbott, and I have it on good authority from a relative who lived and worked there several decades ago that the pronounciation is not əˈbɒtəbɑːd (uh-BOT-uh-bod) as we keep hearing in the news, but more in keeping with the English name Abbott, like ˈæbətəbɑːd (AAH-but-uh-bod).

Anyone actually FROM the region care to comment? I keep feeling like it's being pronounced the way Americans think it should be pronounced without any local input. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.214.176.27 (talk) 14:43, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a local, but my understanding is that the second syllable is pronounced very lightly or not pronounced at all, and that the strongest syllables are the first and the last one. Ondewelle (talk) 06:44, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, please don't “opine”. What we need is proper sources. --Babelfisch (talk) 00:00, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I was merely trying to be helpful. This page is a discussion page, not the encyclopaedia page per se. The person who opened this section asked, not unreasonably, for opinions, and I gave one. I have, in fact, since my earlier entry asked someone who has lived in Abbottabad for many years, though of course that person's answer would not be a proper source for inclusion on the main page, it might be of interest to people reading the discussion page. Ondewelle (talk) 14:55, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Distance to Islamabad[edit]

Should the distance to Islamabad be measured by air or by car? Because this is a mountainous region, there is a substantial difference between the two: geographically the two cities are 50km apart, but the shortest road (that Google maps knows about) is 115km. And saying the city is 50km from the capital gives a rather different impression than saying it is 115km. My personal inclination is for geographical distance, as that seems more "encyclopedic". But this number seems to change every week or two between 50km and 115km. And unfortunately, many news sources seem to blindly quote whatever number is currently on the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.18.169.192 (talk) 19:39, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notable Residents[edit]

After patrolling some cities earlier, (including this one) I wonder if a "notable residents" section should be included that would have Bin Laden, and his cronies. I mean, they did live there for a substantial amount of time, but I don't know if the couriers are locals, but I doubt if they are. I briefly thought that the "twitter leaker" might be appropriate, but I doubt that he would quite be notable enough. Thoughts? --Hourick (talk) 17:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There was something like this in the article ealier, but it was removed per WP:RECENTISM. Here is the diff: [1]. Perhaps if there were a few examples of residents throughout the town's history, there could be a brief mention of bin Laden and his cronies. -- JTSchreiber (talk) 05:16, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Part of me wishes that I could just let this fade away, but the OCD part of me wants this to be consistent with other cities that have a portion set for notable residents. --Hourick (talk) 07:55, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear sirs, i have made some further minor amendments and corrections on this page. However, if its ok, I would also please like to respond to above statements of Hourick and JTSchreiber; as I feel it would be rather unwise to add any 'notable' people columns here--as it is, too many of the sites relating to Pakistan/Pakistani places and tribes, etc, are poorly organied and have extensive lists and names for promotional purposes, which in my view most people are using for self-promotion or promotion of some person, or tribe/group, party and so on, regardless of any Wiki standards for neutrality or notability. Any further encouragement isnt need at all! The mention of OBL which is given here is quite adequate. Indeed, in my opinion, almost 2/3 rds of articles relating to Pakistan need to be checked and rationalised and brought in conformity with Wiki standards. 39.54.98.102 (talk) 04:42, 13 March 2012 (UTC)Prof (r) Asad U Khwaja[reply]

Merge or new section on some neighborhoods?[edit]

There is an article Mandian, Pakistan, which is only a stub and has not much to say, since its only one neighborhood or area of this city. It is suggested that this stub either be merged or deleted. If its is merged, then there is also a possibility of adding a note on some areas or neighborhoods of Abbottabad somewhere in main article. Hope this might please be thought about. 39.54.125.221 (talk) 19:04, 26 April 2012 (UTC)(User Rosalind Edwards, Abbottabad)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Abbottabad. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 10:35, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Abbottabad. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 09:24, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 4 May 2017[edit]

Aamirgis (talk) 05:55, 4 May 2017 (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. Gulumeemee (talk) 09:16, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Abbottabad. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 01:29, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2015 earthquake[edit]

October 2015 earthquake as stated in the article was 2005 

AlexdG (talk) 22:17, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

pictures[edit]

i want to add pictures of Abbottabad city from surrounding mountains... Shahzaibqureshi144 (talk) 09:20, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 3 April 2018[edit]

Haseebullah Popal (talk) 18:10, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i think you should Murree in Abbottabad because if you check the google map you will realize that Murree is in Kpk territory and Abbottabad district covers it.

 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. RivertorchFIREWATER 16:05, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 4 April 2024[edit]

The information about the Pakistan Military Academy in this page should be edited as it is outdated. 38.253.124.5 (talk) 18:45, 4 April 2024 (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. Jamedeus (talk) 19:58, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Abbottabad&oldid=1217263541"