This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tarana-e-Pakistan article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is written in Pakistani English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, travelled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article was nominated for deletion on 14 March 2015. The result of the discussion was no consensus.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs 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.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong
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
Aside from being badly-sourced synthesis etc, this article seems to contradict the content at Pakistan Zindabad (song), which is where TopGun (talk·contribs) originally redirected it. Can someone please explain (I am aware that the Zindabad article refers to East Pakistan, so are we talking two different songs that shared the same title and were written by different people, or what?) - Sitush (talk) 00:01, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Sitush, thanks for your input please see this page where there seemed to have been a prior consensus [[1]] not to mention that no history book anywhere has recorded this claim. However, consensus can change with new information and I am not able to read Urdu ... the citation that is given for the source. However, the following sites and books do not mention it at all (one would think that people would remember if their grand or great grandparents remembered):
Lastly, what I find odd and troubling is that the very newspaper that has been sited had also run this article that contradicts other source (is this news paper credible?):
I don;t think we can use the non-existence of information to support something. We need sources that say it does not exist and those sources must be reliable, otherwise we're engaging in original research. That's why, for example, I removed some blogs. It doesn't surprise me that a newspaper contradicts itself: they often do for weird things like this and thus we should not use them. - Sitush (talk) 05:54, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking the time to do some research. Out of curiosity, if and when an article is nominated for deletion, who monitors it that it does not come back on (unless of course there is new credible source)? lilpiglet 06:59, 12 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilpiglet (talk • contribs)
I've not looked at your links yet but the answer to your query regarding deletion is variabnle. If I put something up for deletion and it is in fact deleted, I still leave the article on my watchlist. That way, if someone recreates the thing it will reappear there as a blue link. There are times when recreation is justified, of course. - Sitush (talk) 21:51, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Smsarmad:, are you aware of any history relating to this subject or the article itself? Has it been deleted before, perhaps under a slightly different title? Should I take it to the Pakistan project talk page? I know that there is no problem hosting articles about hoaxes if the hoax itself is notable but it strikes me that there is a lot of synthesis and outright WP:OR going on here to create a sense of a notable hoax/false claim. - Sitush (talk) 21:55, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Up till now I wasn't aware of this, neither do I know anything about this or similar article's history. What I can gather from the sources here and some that I have gone through, that the sources that claim that this poem was Pakistan's first National anthem are all based on Azad's self claim that he made in an interview to Luv Puri, and the controversy following that interview has found some space in the print media since then, leaving little ground for us to ignore it completely. But I am not sure what to do: Have a stand alone article as it is now or merge it with Qaumi Taranah? Neither am I sure you will get any response at WT:PAK, but you can always try. -- SMSTalk15:11, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I redireceted it to Pakistan Zindabad (song) in reference to the statement on that article, "The song is in Bengali, the language of East Pakistan, and was adopted from a poem by East Pakistani (now Bangladeshi) poet Golam Mostofa named Tarana-e-Pakistan". That song was adopted from a poem named Tarana-e-Pakistan. I'm not aware if it was the same poem or not, but this article was created on something completely different. I redirected it so that if some one searches for the term Tarana-e-Pakistan, he would go to the nearest notable thing (ie. the song derived from it). Anyway wikipedia is not a news site... There's no source in which Pakistan has any records or recognition of it as a first national anthemn.. I don't know why a claim would deserve an encyclopedic article... a news article is the most it would get. As SMS says, at most maybe put a line in Qaumi Tarana article about the claim (that too after discussed consensus). --lTopGunl (talk)00:56, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, both. I think you're right: this is a merge job, and it should probably end up being no more than a short section in the target article. The whimsical ideas of a single person do not deserve such coverage as they are getting at present. - Sitush (talk) 01:07, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
