Talk:Chitral (princely state)

India: Geography / History Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Indian geography workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).

Pakistan Mid‑importance

	Pakistan portal 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Why Chitral

My question to the Indian History experts is why have you chosen Chitral, out of all of the former Pakistani princely states to be included in the Wiki History of India project?

Chitral has not been ruled by any major Indian power thoughout its history. This includes ancient dynasties such as the Mauryas and Guptas and medieval ones like the Delhi Sultanate and Mughals.

The only period it was under slight Indian influence was for a few decades when it had treaty relations with Dogra Kashmir, Chitral has always been considered an independent land. Hunza and Nagar were Dogra Vassals up until 1947, but Chitral threw off Dogra Suzerainity in 1911.

If you are to include Pakistani Princely States in the Indian History Project, then include them all, but it is highly odd that you choose to include Chitral, a region with strong links to Central Asia and surrounded by Afghanistan on two sides, which has very little importance in the area of Indian history.

NOT at all odd my dear friend. Chitral was listed an an 'Indian Princely state' and an important one at that, from various 'Great Game' and stragetic perspectives no? The ruler was also recognised and received various honours etc from the British Indian govt from c 1870s to 1940s, so why cant Chitral be listed? I think thats great actually! 39.54.8.147 (talk) 12:56, 12 April 2012 (UTC)ZafarR[reply]

Added WikiProject Pakistan

Added WikiProject Pakistan template
Pahari Sahib @09:49, 28 September 2007 (GMT)

Chitral being important

One should keep it in mind that Chitral has been an important princely state of all as it has a history related with that of India also and one has to be first familiar with the history, language and the area to then talk about something of. Chitral is no doubt much linked culturally to Central Asia but has been for a long period a home of Aryans and contains in the language a good part of Sanskrit. The Chitral population is the outcome of a mixture of Turkish and Aryan breed and similar is the language that is totally a Turko-Aryan one. If needed a glossary may be arranged of Turkish and Aryan words.(Mohammad Ilyas 20:53, 21 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

OBL Reference

The issue of whether or not Bin Laden is in the vicinity of Chitral has nothing to do with the historic State of Chitral, these comments belong on the pages for the NWFP or for the modern Chitral District. I am thus deleting these irrelevant comments. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.99.190.219 (talk) 18:58, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use candidate from Commons: File:Mehtar Saif Ur Rehman.jpg

The file File:Mehtar Saif Ur Rehman.jpg, used on this page, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons and re-uploaded at File:Mehtar Saif Ur Rehman.jpg. It should be reviewed to determine if it is compliant with this project's non-free content policy, or else should be deleted and removed from this page. If no action is taken, it will be deleted after 7 days. Commons fair use upload bot (talk) 16:35, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use candidate from Commons: File:Mehtar Saif Ur Rehman.jpg

The file File:Mehtar Saif Ur Rehman.jpg, used on this page, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons and re-uploaded at File:Mehtar Saif Ur Rehman.jpg. It should be reviewed to determine if it is compliant with this project's non-free content policy, or else should be deleted and removed from this page. If no action is taken, it will be deleted after 7 days. Commons fair use upload bot (talk) 19:15, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chitral (princely state). 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/20131029191751/http://election.rtilive.pk/election/member_detail/79977 to http://election.rtilive.pk/election/member_detail/79977

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) 19:35, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]