Talk:Faisalabad

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Faisalabad article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 28 days

This article is written in Pakistani English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, travelled) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

	Faisalabad was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result June 20, 2016 Good article nominee Listed November 13, 2025 Good article reassessment Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Cities Cities portal 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. Punjab High‑importance Punjab portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Punjab, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Punjab 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. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Pakistan: Cities High‑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. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Pakistani cities. Guild of Copy Editors This article was copy edited by Atsme, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 28 January 2016.

World Gazetteer populations of localities in Faisalabad area

• Faisalabad City: 2,582,175
• Chak Jhumra: 38,059
• Jaranwala: 122,044
• Sammundri: 68,528
• Tandlianwala: 38,864
• Dijkot: 28,093
• Khurianwala: 36,093
• Mamu Kanjan: 32,639

Which Lyall?

Confusion over Sir James Lyall vs Sir Charles James Lyall has been resolved. It's Sir James Lyall. See discussion: Talk:Charles James Lyall#City named after him

Which Sir James Lyall was Lyallpur named after? Charles James Lyall or James Broadwood Lyall? The source given in our article and the Encyclopedia Britannica article say it's Charles James Lyall, the Lt. Governon of Punjab. Fine, but this seems self-contradictory as this Lyall doesn't appear to have ever been a Governon of Punjab (not mentioned in his article, seems unlikely given the rest of his career, doesn't appear in List of governors of Punjab (British India)). James Broadwood Lyall on the other hand was a Lt. Governor of Punjab, and roughly at the same time that the city was founded, and in the History section of the current article there's mention of his involvement in its creation. The sources I've encountered so far mostly simply say "James Lyall, the Lt. Governor of Punjab" without indicating which of the two that is [1] [2]). It seems most reasonable that this is James Broadwoood Lyall, and that the sources that have it as Charles James Lyall are in error. Any thoughts? Noting there was an earlier discussion in 2011. – Uanfala (talk) 15:30, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply] It was Charles James Lyall. I linked to the book, and also updated the Lyall bio. ^Atsme📞📧 15:45, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply] How do you know? My point was that the claim in the book, which you've now copied to Charles' article, is unreliable. – Uanfala (talk) 15:49, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply] Adding that The 1911 edition of EB has that as James Broadwood Lyall. – Uanfala (talk) 15:52, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply] Sorry, but you are incorrect. There is not just one claim in one book. There are numerous. Perhaps you would be kind enough to cite more RS instead? The James Broadwood Lyall info is incorrect and needs to be corrected throughout Wikipedia. He was never the Lt. Gov of Punjab. A simple Google searches show you numerous RS that Charles James Lyall was the Lt. Gov. The links that showed James Broadwood were WP links. See page 257 and tell me where it says he was ever Lt. Gov. The same applies to numerous other sources. ^Atsme📞📧 16:18, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply] The source you now linked to gives James Broadwood as a Lt. Governor of Punjab, while mentioning nothing of the sort for Charles James. – Uanfala (talk) 16:22, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply] I'm finding mixed information...give me a minute, and if you can, please research as well. ^Atsme📞📧 16:43, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply] (edit conflict) You're wrong, Atsme. See the discussion at Talk:Charles James Lyall also. - Sitush (talk) 16:44, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply] Yes, that's where I posted a long list of RS that support my position. Tag, you're it. ^Atsme📞📧 22:27, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

Faisalabad

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delisted. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:49, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA from 2016. Multiple uncited sections and general article structuring issues. Onegreatjoke (talk) 02:01, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I might try to work on it. Probably beyond anything I can do. 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 13:25, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Chicdat: There are still uncited statements in the article, and your last edit was Sept 1. Are you or other editors reading this still interested in addressing concerns? Z1720 (talk) 14:01, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging MSLQr who is certainly far more of an expert in this area than I and who has been doing some work on it. 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 14:08, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MSLQr Any further plans on working on this? Your last batch of edits here were in late September. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 21:56, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, busy in life, I think I will not be available (this month). In turn, pinged Atsme, the major contributor to this article. MŠLQr (talk) 05:27, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of going through the painstaking reassessment process because a few citations are needed, how about taking a few minutes to simply add the citations? Atsme 💬 📧 15:40, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Real life is more important than a green checkmark. Give MSLQr time, or you can take on the job instead if you want. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 18:11, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.