Talk:Mirpur, Azad Kashmir

message: Cleanup is badly needed - especially on the surroundings section. I am not very experienced in this so I have flagged it so that someone can do a good job. The POV and general unprofessional nature of the article make it read more of a advertisement for certain areas rather than a encyclopaedia entry. 87.194.26.229 03:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The website link at the bottom of the infobox is no longer working. Does any local area user know if the MDA has closed down, or is it just that their system is down? Richard Harvey (talk) 23:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Mirpur Development Authority

message: Almost everyone in Mirpur knows somebody living in England. This article really should mention something about the huge number of Mirpuri people that form part of the British Pakistani community. I would have added something myself but the article is locked by Administrators. If somebody does get the chance to edit, the following BBC link might be useful - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6178092.stm - Thanks Sansonic (talk) 19:40, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Its now been returned to semi-protection so you should be able to edit it yourself :).
PS you are able to challenge protections on WP:RUP -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 15:33, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  British Pakistanis 

message: The reason I have deleted some of the twinned cities is because most of them were wrong. I referenced all the ones i could find however manchester is twinned with faisalabad not mirpur and maidenhead, luton, leeds, nottingham, newcastle, oldham and slough are not twinned with mirpur. if u can prove that they are and reference it go right ahead but i've done a lot of searching for them but they simply are not twinned with mirpur Hrh80 (talk) 23:48, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Sister Cities

message: Both India and Pakistan want this land; Pakistan has controlled it for a long time.  I just reverted some user's edits changing this from Pakistani land to Indian.  Anyone wanting to change the article in this way ought to state their reasoning on this board. Blue Rasberry 00:46, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Ownership disputed

message: Could an interwiki for मीर पोर be added?
:Done, thanks. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:06, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interwiki 

message: 86.181.72.156 (talk) 15:52, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from 86.181.72.156, 18 August 2010 

message: There have been continued attempts by someone editing and changing the founder of Mirpur from Gakhar to Sayyid tribe. 
Please find the URL for page 115 of Imperial Gazetteer of India  Provincial Series: Kashmir and Jammu By Walter Roper Lawrence 1909, where the ethnic origin of Mirpur founders is provided as Gakhars.  Any attempts to falsify history should not be allowed.
http://books.google.ca/books?id=TvkpSbmwrf8C&pg=PA115&dq=mirpur&hl=en&ei=QGvQTZWqEMnq0QGit5T0DQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=mirpur&f=false  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.12.40.129 (talk) 00:26, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of Mirpur, Ethnic origin of Mirpur founder 

message: The following coordinate fixes are needed for mirpur azad kashmir
Latitude	Longitude
33.15110	73.73602
—Ditaksar (talk) 22:16, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Sumanch (talk) 14:08, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinate error 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Mirpur, Azad Kashmir. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.khalidhasan.net/2007/03/16/mirpur-1947-%E2%80%93-the-untold-story
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://udayindia.org/content_08may2010/statescan.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:35, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Daqkssmak (talk) 07:58, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: Daqkssmak, schools are only listed if they have an existing Wikipedia article. If you are affiliated with this school system, please about our conflict of interest guidelines. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 22:09, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 28 February 2018 

message: Can anyone give a justification for having a 'Surroundings' section in the current format? There is nothing of the sort suggested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/Settlements: Article structure along those lines. Perhaps a Geography section, which could include some text on the surroundings and the content from Climate, could be added in due course. Meanwhile 'Surroundings' might best be deleted as being off topic.SovalValtos (talk) 20:13, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed - as often happens, some editors appear confused about the scope of the article - it is about Mirpur City - Mirpur District is a separate article, which should deal with the "surroundings" - Arjayay (talk) 09:30, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Surroundings 

message: Various scholars have written on the Instrument of Accession (Jammu and Kashmir), The Treaty of Lahore (9 March 1846) and the Treaty of Amritsar (16 March 1846). But very little of that text is on wikipedia.
Maharaja gulab Singh originally worked for the Sikh Empire. But then betrayed the Sikh empire by siding with the East India Company in the Anglo-Sikh War. His name is mentioned in the treaty of Lahore too. He collected Taxes for the East India Company and the money was then given by him to the East India Company.
The Treaty of Lahore (9 March 1846) and the Treaty of Amritsar (16 March 1846) lapsed under Article 7 of the Independence Act 1947. The Act was passed by the British Parliament on July 18, 1947 to assent to the creation of the independent states of India and Pakistan. The aforementioned Article 7 provides that, with the lapse of His Majesty’s suzerainty over the Indian states, all treaties, agreements, obligations, grants, usages and sufferance’s will lapse. 
The 7 year old Maharaja Duleep Singh Bahadur (Sikh) was under the control of the East India company when he sign The Treaty of Lahore on 9 March 1846 which gave Jammu and Kashmir and its people to the East India Company. 
Under the British legal system and international law a treaty signed by the 7 year old Maharaja Duleep Singh Bahadur and under duress is not valid. (The International Court of Justice has stated that there "can be little doubt, as is implied in the Charter of the United Nations and recognized in Article 52 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, that under contemporary international law an agreement concluded under the threat or use of force is void.) 
We may need to add a section on the impact on the removal of Article 370 of the Indian constitution on The Instrument of Accession too. 
None of this text is on there.
Various scholars have written on these treaties, for example Alistair Lamb disputed the validity of the Instrument of Accession in his paper Myth of Indian Claim to JAMMU & KASHMIR –– A REAPPRAISAL'
Where he writes "While  the  date,  and  perhaps  even  the  fact,  of  the accession to India of the State of Jammu  &  Kashmir in  late  October  1947  can  be  questioned,  there  is  no  dispute  at  that time   any   such   accession   was   presented   to   the   world at large   as   conditional   and provisional. It  was  not  communicated  to  Pakistan  at  the outset  of  the  overt  Indian  intervention  in  the  State  of Jammu  &  Kashmir,  nor  was  it presented  in  facsimile  to  the  United  Nations  in  early  1948  as  part  of  the  initial  Indian reference  to  the  Security  Council.  The  1948  White  Paper  in  which  the  Government  of India set out its formal case in respect to the State of Jammu & Kashmir, does not contain the  Instrument  of  Accession  as  claimed  to  have  been  signed  by  the  Maharajah: instead, it reproduces  an  unsigned  form  of  Accession  such  as,  it  is  implied,  the  Maharajah  might have  signed.   To   date   no   satisfactory   original   of   this   Instrument   as   signed   by  the Maharajah has  been  produced: though  a  highly  suspect  version,  complete  with  the false date  26 October 1947,  has  been  circulated  by  the  Indian  side  since  the  1960s. On the present  evidence  it  is  by  no means clear  that  the  Maharaja  ever  did  sign an Instrument of Accession.  
Indian troops actually began overtly to intervene in the State’s affairs on the morning of 27 October 1947
It  is  now  absolutely  clear  that  the  two  documents  (a) the Instrument of Accession, and  (c)  the  letter  to  Lord  Mountbatten,  could  not  possibly  have  been  signed  by the Maharajah  of Jammu  &  Kashmir on 26 October 1947. The earliest possible time and date for their signature would have to be the afternoon of 27 October 1947. During 26 October 1947  the  Maharajah  of Jammu  &  Kashmir was  travelling  by  road  from  Srinagar  to Jammu. (The Kashmir State Army divisions and the Kashmiri people had already turned on him and he was on the run and had no authority in the state). His  new Prime  Minister,  M.C.  Mahajan,  who  was  negotiating  with  the Government of India,  and  the  senior  Indian  official  concerned  in  State  matters,  V.P.  Menon, were still in New  Delhi  where  they  remained  overnight,  and  where  their  presence  was  noted  by many observers.  There  was  no  communication  of  any  sort  between  New Delhi and the travelling Maharajah.  Menon  and  Mahajan  set  out  by  air  from  New  Delhi  to  Jammu  at about  10.00 a.m.  on  27  October; and  the  Maharajah  learned  from  them  for  the  first time the result of his Prime Minister’s negotiations in New Delhi in the early afternoon of that day. The  key  point,  of  course,  as has already been noted above, is that it is now obvious that  these  documents  could  only  have  been  signed  after  the  overt  Indian  intervention  in the  State  of Jammu  &  Kashmir on 27 October 1947.  When  the  Indian  troops  arrived  at  Srinagar  air  field,  that State   was   still   independent.   Any   agreements   favourable   to   India   signed   after   such intervention  cannot  escape  the  charge  of  having  been  produced  under  duress. (The International Court of Justice has stated that there "can be little doubt, as is implied in the Charter of the United Nations and recognized in Article 52 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, that under contemporary international law an agreement concluded under the threat or use of force is void.)"
Additionally Maharaja was on the run. The prevailing international practice on the recognition of state governments is based on the following three factors: first, the government’s actual control of the territory; second, the government’s enjoyment of the support and obedience of the majority of the population; third, the government’s ability to stake the claim that it has a reasonable expectation of staying in power. The situation on the ground demonstrates that the Maharaja was not in control of the state of Jammu and Kashmir and was fleeing for his life and almost all of Kashmir was under the control of the Kashmiri people and the Kashmiri Army that had rebelled against him. His own troops had turned on him. With regard to the Maharaja’s control over the local population, it is clear that he enjoyed no such control or support. The people of Kashmir had been sold by the East India Company and he charged them high taxes thetefore the Kashmir Muslims, Hindus Pandits and Buddhists hated him. Furthermore, the state’s armed forces were in total disarray after most of the men turned against him and he was running for his life. Finally, it is highly doubtful that the Maharaja could claim that his government had a reasonable chance of staying in power without Indian military intervention. This assumption is substantiated by the Maharaja’s letters.
Many of these treaties apply to Jammu and Kashmir. The Kashmir conflict is already on Wikipedia. It is internationally recognized as a disputed territory under various United United Nations resolutions that are already listed on Wikipedia Nations Security Council Resolution 47, Nations Security Council Resolution 39,mediation of the Kashmir dispute, Nations Commission for India and Pakistan. There is a lot of documentation on Jammu and Kashmir in the UN archives already. If you look at the page Kashmir conflict, it already contains sections on the "Indian view", "Pakistani view", "Chinese view", "Kashmiri views". May be we could do something like that with these treaty pages. The Treaty of Lahore was signed in 9 March 1846 and the Treaty of Amritsar 16 March 1846. They predate the creation of both modern day India and Pakistan. The Treaty of Lahore was signed between the Sikh Empire and the British government. It is an international treaty and comes under international law. Johnleeds1 (talk) 11:36, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Johnleeds1 what specific changes do you have in mind for improving the article?SovalValtos (talk) 14:11, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Treaties on Kashmir 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover)  ASUKITE 16:17, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Mirpur, Pakistan →  – 1. It is located in the Azad Kashmir region
2. It's a disputed territory between Pakistan and India, so adding Pakistan's name at the end is both unnecessary and against the Wikipedia WP:NEUTRAL policy Echo1Charlie (talk) 09:39, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

text: PS: and the Mirpur should to be move to Mirpur (disambiguation). BeanGreenCar (talk) 06:18, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think I can see a primary topic there. There certainly isn't one with respect to usage: the clickstream data for the month of March shows that the city received only about a third of the outgoing traffic from the dab page. – Uanfala (talk) 12:49, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 8 November 2021 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Skarmory (talk • contribs) 04:19, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: , I've formatted the request to include the moves implied by your proposal, per the RM instructions. Please check I've got that right. Uanfala (talk) 11:01, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 28 August 2022 

message: This section needs to be verified, or removed. From what I can see, none of the sources are reliable or are according to WP:NPOV, but would like opinions before I make any edits on this, as I'm not very educated on this subject. نعم البدل (talk) 03:13, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Demographics#Hindu and Sikh communities