Talk:Baramulla

India: Cities / Jammu and Kashmir Mid‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Indian cities (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Jammu and Kashmir (assessed as High-importance).

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

Third largest city??

Mythology has it that Vishnu took the shape of of Vraha (boar) and hit the bank of the lake with a Mulla (in this case a molar tooth) and thus created a passage to drain the lake. Therefore the genuine name of this place a Vrahamulla (in modern Kashmiri Varmull).

How can Baramulla be the third largest city if it is listed after Srinagar, Jammu and Anantnag?? Denisarona (talk) 17:39, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Baramulla. 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/20060613025308/http://www.acig.org:80/artman/publish/article_321.shtml to http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_321.shtml

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:17, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Baramulla. 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: 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) 14:09, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

October 1947

@Rao Ravindra: You have reverted most of my edits today. Here is my justification for the edits:

The first paragraph, regarding Sheikh Abdullah, has nothing to do with Baramulla, and should be removed. You have added some sources, which are neither WP:RS nor do they fully support the content anyway.
And, you say If you want to name the tribe be more specific. Pashtuns is an ethnicity, not a "tribe". Is it known that the majority of the invaders were Mahsuds? Do you haven an RS for it? Even if they were a majority, there were others too, weren't they? Why this obsession with Mahsuds?
And there is a route given: Rawalpindi-Murree-Muzaffarabad. Is there an RS for it? Is it relevant to Baramulla?
Operation Gulmarg is still a theory; there are no RS that attest it. It cannot be used without attribution to sources. Once again, that term is not relevant to this article.

That entire section is an extremely poor shape. Baramulla deserves better than this.

I encourage you to clean it up and make it more encyclopedic and use better quality sources. Pinging Tyler Durden in case he is interested to help. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:03, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Baramulla. 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: 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) 20:26, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid source on demography

Provided I didn't miss something, the source used for demography data is invalid.

The main infobox (top of the article) claims the popoulation is 1015503 "as per the 2011 consensus" (uncited). Moreover, searching for the city in the consensus doesn't yield any results ("No matching records found"). Additionally, the demographics section claims the population is 200k. The wording also makes it seem as if it's directly behind three cities; Crinagar, Jammu, and Anantnag. However, with the listed 200k population, that doesn't add up because Srinagar has a population of 1.18 million in the 2011 consensus, Jammu is listed with 502 thousand, and Anantnag is listed with about 110 thousand.

To make things more interesting, the section for the state the city is in doesn't actually list Baramulla (I cannot link the page because it's blacklisted by Wikipedia. You can find it by going to the 2011 consensus, searching for Jammu, and clicking on the region name). Additionally, the 2001 census linked in the first paragraph lists a city called "Baramula" (I'm not sure if the missing L is significant) with a population of about 70k. If you've kept up, that means there's so far 3 vastly different population numbers, two of which are unsourced and one of which may be for another city.

I also can't track down the city with either of the two other names listed in the section in the consensus. In addition, the website links appears to be dead (archive.org cross-reference from 2016). -- OliviaZoe0 ❤️ (She/her) (talk) 11:37, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As per the District Census Handbook, page 28, the population of the city is 71,434 in 2011. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:35, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]