Talk:List of districts of Pakistan/Archive 1

common format

The districts of Pakistan now follow predominantly the "X District" format. Probably all districts are named after rivers, towns or people. I created some dab pages or town-stubs at the old places. The districts now use the same format as the districts of India and lots of other subnational entities worldwide.

IMO it is better to use a common format, for esthetic reasons and to avoid having "Hyderabad District" for India and "Hyderabad (district)" for Pakistan. This could very fast lead to wrong links. Now every link as to explicitly state whether it refers to Hyderabad District, Pakistan or Hyderabad District, India.

I could not move the following to that format and propose to do so:

Pishin district
Ziarat District, Pakistan

Tobias Conradi (Talk) 19:28, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. We should all try to remain consistent. --Khoikhoi 23:26, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Placement of maps

Hmm. I've tried to move up the maps by using a table inside a table. {{Politics of Pakistan}} is just very big. If users resize the window the first map will just be laid over the Politics box. --Ligulem 10:01, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I made a proposal for a replacement template for {{Politics of Pakistan}} at the bottom of [1] which is a copy of this article here with the new look I propose. Instead of the long box on the top right, I propose to make a wide box on the bottom. We could put the contents of this box into {{Politics of Pakistan}} and move the template call to the bottom of the articles. Comments? --Ligulem 13:40, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that sounds like a good idea. I mean, the template is too big. --Khoikhoi 17:39, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've just taken a look at the history of {{Politics of Pakistan}} and I must say, strangely, one of the older versions wasn't that bad. I'm wondering wether it wouldn't simply be good to go back to for example to this version of {{Politics of Pakistan}}. The "bloating" happenend on this edit which lead to that first big version. What I did in my sandbox is converting the "big" version to a new layout for the bottom of the article without thinking much about the content, because I'm not an expert of Pakistan politics. What I can say is that redlinks in boxes are not so elegant. Options over options :-). --Ligulem 17:55, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can tell you that most politics template aren't supposed to be that big. See Template:Politics of Papua New Guinea for example. I say revert to the small version. --Khoikhoi 18:31, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I'll post a note on the talk of {{Politics of Pakistan}}. Let's discuss that there so others can see that too. --Ligulem 19:00, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A request

I have created stubs about Pakistan's districts. All are important stubs of one of the important sovereign states of the Indian subcontinent. Suggestions are invited on the talk page of the respective districts. Template:WikiProject Pakistani districts is also available now. --Bhadani 16:52, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Current district maps

Lots of these pages are missing maps, or the maps are outdated (Mirpur Khas, for example). Here is a link to a current map of the Sindh districts.

http://www.lgdsindh.com.pk/districts1.htm

Also, here is a listing with more info about the Sindh districts.

http://www.nrb.gov.pk/lg_election/results.asp?state=2

How many in Balochistan?

An IP recently changed 27 to 29, which I accidentally reverted while cleaning up after other editors. If 29 is true, please edit Balochistan (Pakistan) accordingly if it still says 27 by the time you read this. Wikipeditor 03:10, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chiniot District

currently there are 36 districts in punjab, chiniot is a newly constructed district of punjab. any one having doubt in this can see this link and this one. --Talha^Discuss ^© 07:38, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Area of Gilgit-Baltistan

The total in the area fo subdivisions of Gilgit-Baltistan is not correct it does not add up to the figure mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivazir (talk • contribs) 11:10, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Balochistan map vs text

The numbering for Balochistan's districts is off. Could someone please correct them? Silal (talk) 11:51, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not only is the numbering off, its an outdated map ! 19 is Musakhel and not Naseerabad ! Washuk is not shown on the map ! User:rehanafzal —Preceding undated comment added 09:17, 22 July 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Districts in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

Summary table claims 24, section lists 25. --Stfg (talk) 13:26, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]