Jump to content

Talk:Ayub Khan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

THE PHOTO FOR AYUB KHAN AND YAHA KHAN IS THE SAME. SEE THAT ARTICLE. I DONT KNOW WHICH ONE IS CORRECT. PLEASE CHANGE!!! --203.197.115.38 05:32, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That seems to have been fixed now. Walkerma 21:05, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted in order to remove 172.166.119.221's addition: “Ayub plainly regretted ever calling elections in the first place. For after six years of insisting that Pakistanis were not ready for democracy, the campaign had shown that Mohammed Ayub Khan probably wasn't either.” What's plainly true to one person won't be to another; is there any evidence for this regret? Similarly for Khan's lack of preparedness? Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:15, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Paragraph needs work.

[edit]

In the last paragraph of the section on th71.139.2.186 (talk) 04:05, 29 June 2008 (UTC)e 1965 war, the first sentence ("These were the years when Pakistan in 1963 imprudently all ...") doesn't make sense, and the rest of the paragraph needs work in general.Dcheng 03:28, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited the first sentence of that paragraph with the information which i have. But i can't find any other mistake like that in the rest of the paragraph.Sarmad (talk) 13:06, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed Ayub is a Pashtun

[edit]

I dont know who is writing this article but ayub khan was a proud pashtun not a hindko, maybe he was a hindko but hindkos are pashtuns loool. his parents were pashtuns, He spoke pashto, he grew up with pashtuns but at the end was labeled a hindko loool. the article must be written back to him being Pashtun and is noted in the history books as a pashtun. What more evidence???71.139.34.11 (talk) 05:29, 3 March 2008 (UTC)Pashtun786[reply]

LOL at the above comment. You are welcome to check on from even his family, they dont speak in Pashtu, they speak in Hindko and belong from the Haripur District of Hazara Division. And Ayub Khan himself also talked in Hindko not pashtu, he might be knowing it as a secondary language but his language was Hindko, and that is not disputed.Wikitanoli (talk) 06:31, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Confuse... and somehow hagiographic

[edit]

That’s what I find about the article in its current version. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.52.232.106 (talk) 07:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

_________________________________________________________________ AYUB KHAN IS PASHTUN Ayub Khan is definetly Pashtun spoke pashto not Hindko, its seems that every person that is pashtun is some how a Hindko nowadays, maybe they dont want to give pashtuns full credit, they attached Hindko to show that hindko also claim him and they should get credit. Plus Hindko's are pashtuns. 71.139.2.186 (talk) 04:05, 29 June 2008 (UTC)Pashtun786[reply]


Ayub Khan was Pushtun

[edit]

Ayub Khan was a pushtun, given the fact that he was from a pushtun tribe called Tareen. But you are wrong at one place.

You are WRONG to call all Hindkowans as Pushtuns. I am offended by this call being a Hashmi Awan (Pakistan) of Arab origin. Hindkowans is a group of people who belong to various tribes of Indian, Afghan, Persian and Arab origin. They came together and spoke a common language called Hindko. So a Hindkowan can be a Pushtun, punjabi or an Arab. It is possible for a person to be Hinkowan and Arab at the same time (like me) or Hindkowan and Pashtun at the same time like Ayub KHan. What language Ayub Khan spoke is a separate issue and I have no idea about it :). But his son and grandson, Gohar Ayub and Omar Ayub speak Hindko language. So they are Hindkowans of Pushtun origin.

I feel that it will not be wrong to call Ayub Khan a Hindkowan of Pushtun origin as he was from a Hazara and his family speak Hindko. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.131.166.20 (talk) 12:19, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I agree with the last commentator that Hindko is a language not an ethnic group. Ayub Khan was a tareen and as such a Pashtun. Secondly, Hindkowan is a term that was devised for Peshawaris of Kharay group who are by and large Awans and it does not sit very well with Hazara region's tribes as many of those speak both Hindko and Pushto while others speak either Pashto or Hindko but cannot be called Hindkowans as majority are Pashtuns. Whatever they may speak now the Pashtuns of Hazara were speaking Pushto until quite recently. Nobody can say the Swatis, Jadoon, Tahirkhels, Utmanzais, Tanwalis etc. do not/did not speak Pashto.


There is misconception about the origins of Awans . Awans have arab origins they are decsendants of Qutb Shah(Aun ibn Yeila) , who was hashemite decendant of Hazarat Ali(RA).Awans are not decendants of Qutbuddin . There are many groups of people of turk, persian and indian origins who call themselves as Awans like the many hindki speaking people of Peshawar and bannu.Real Awans are living dominantly in areas like Mianwali , Khushab , Chakwal , Attock , Rawalpindi , Sudhanoti district of azad kashmir , Kohat , Mardan (Sawal dher village).If you compare Awans of these areas mentioned above with the awans of bannu , and peshawar there is a big difference The awans of hindko community of peshawar and bannu have dark skin , short in height while the awans of above mentioned areas are tall have fair skin and have strong physique.According to genetics Awans of above mentioned areas have arab origin but awans of hinko community of bannu , peshawar have different origins they have mix origins of Afghans(turks) , uzbeks and jatts , they are not real awans but show themselves as awans , like many mughal they often show themselves as Pathans and some rajputs claims to be of persian origins and arab origins also like khokhar rajput , Chauhan rajput and khattar rajput they also claim ancestry from qutb shah. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.47.12.219 (talk) 05:42, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar + POV

[edit]

there's a lot of grammatical errors that i couldnt go through and fix right now, also the point of views throughout the biography section, and the other sections could use some cleaning up.

You mean 'There are a lot of grammatical errors...' - the word errors is plural so you must predicate it as such. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moarrikh (talk • contribs) 13:54, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Flickr pictures

[edit]

[1]

Ayub Khan signing the Tashkent Agreement in 1966. this picture can be used and placed in the Wikipedia Commons.

Description: "Commerce Minister Ghulam Faruque, Foreign Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and Foreign Secretary Aziz Ahmed look on. Prime Minister Shastri died the same night of a heart attack. A member of Pakistan entourage woke up the Foreign Minister and told him on the telephone, 'The bastard is dead'. Still in his sleep Bhutto asked 'Which one?'"


Ayub Khan's Ethnic Descent

[edit]

Dear Wikipedia, I keep editing out the Category 'Pashtun people' and adding 'Pakistani people of Afghan descent', which is more accurate, but this first is added again and my entry deleted. I must please request some neutral Wiki overseer to kindly make an honest assessment -- according to every exisiting record Ayub Khan was a 'Hindkowan' Tareen, a Hindko speaker of Afghan descent/origin, whose elders had settled in Haripur area of Hazara division, now in Pakistan, during the 18th century. Even the old British military/army establishment classified such ethnic stock as 'Hazarawals and Hazarawal-Pushtuns' and not as Pathans/Pushtuns per se. You are very welcome to check this out and confirm. Like all such settlers, who have Pushtun/Afghan origins but might not be classified as 'Pashtuns' in the strictest sense today, the natural and most suitable classification or category here seems to be 'Pakistani (or Indian) people of Afghan descent'. Id be grateful if this change is duly implemented, thank you. 39.54.242.79 (talk) 13:30, 11 March 2012 (UTC)Dr HP Gupta[reply]

I basically dispite this, please, and would request a proper resolution thanks 39.54.242.79 (talk) 13:32, 11 March 2012 (UTC) HP Gupta[reply]

Hi, I am neutral with respect to this but I removed the category as no source was given. Please give a reliable source which states that he is from Afghan decent and probably mention it in the article so that this can be classified under that category. If you have sources, you're free to make the edit. --lTopGunl (talk) 13:35, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mr TopGun Hi, as even Gen Ayub Khan mentions in his own autobiography, "Friends Not Masters", he is of Tareen origins/tribe, Bate zai section--and they originally hail from Tarin Kot, in Qandahar area of Afghanistan. His elders came and settled here in the 18th century. If you would please look up various/several sources on origins of the Pushtuns/Pathans (eg Caroe, Olaf, 'The Pathans', 1959; RTI Ridgeway "The Pathans', 1911 etc) you would certainly know that the Pathans/Pushtuns were originally known as 'Afghans' and during the time of Ahmad Shah Durrani gave their name to 'Afghanistan'. Term 'Afghan' itself derived from the name 'Afghana', who was the grandfather supposedly of Qais or Abdur Rashid, the remote progenitor of all Afghans/Pushtuns. In this sense, the word does not mean the same thing as implying citizenship of a country called Afghanistan but being of Afghan descent/descended from Afghana. I think (as Caroe, Spain (1969) and several other scholars point out, most people tend to also confuse (a) Afghan descent with being a Pushtu speaker; and (b) on this basis also confuse the fact that some people/settlers in parts of India and Pakistan eg the Tareen and Jadun Afghans of Hazara area, the Niazis and Burkis of Ludhiana etc, are very much 'Afghans' descended from Afghana, even though not Pushtu speakers anymore and thus not generally classifiesd as Pushtuns proper. I think that is a very siginificant distiction and must be adhered to. Thank you. 39.54.242.79 (talk) 13:52, 11 March 2012 (UTC)HP Gupta[reply]

If you can cite the sources you claim inline and add this to the article, by all means change the category (and remember to remove the tags when you do). I do not dispute your additions but do ask for sources which are required per wikipedia's no original research policy. Thanks. --lTopGunl (talk) 13:58, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Former Queen of Pakistan??

[edit]

Recently, there is a photo added by Lilpiglet, description of that photo reads as "Queen Elizabeth II, former Queen of Pakistan and Ayub Khan". I have confronted that term "Former Queen of Pakistan" for Queen Elizabeth ||, i do not think that this is a right term to use here. First of all this term is not verifiable by any reliable sources, secondly it is controvercial to begin with that she can be called Queen of Pakistan. Thirdly, even if she can be called as Queen of Pakistan, she can also be at the same time be called as Queen of Australia, India, Burma and so many other commonwealth nations so i do not see a point of mentioning her as Queen of Pakistan. There is another issue here. Subject of this article is Ayub Khan and not the Queen so photo description should say "Ayub Khan with Queen Elizabeth II and Commonwealth prime minister" and not the other way around. I will be changing the description to a description which won't seem controvercial and i suggest that description should not be changed. Anyone seeking to change the description and changing Queen's title to "Former Queen of Pakistan" must provide a reliable source which uses that term for her. Moreover, i will suggest people to not use the term "my work" because nobody owns any thing on Wikipedia, when something is released on Wikipedia, anyone can make changes to it. See Wikipedia: Ownership of articles. Sajjad Altaf (talk) 15:59, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Sajjad Altaf, by calling her Queen of India just goes to show how little (if any) you know of the subject and are reverting factual sources of information (as she NEVER was Queen of India (EVER). Here is an idea, go to Lahore and to the Quaid e Azam Library and study the archives there yourself for real sources. But then again, there is amble sources on wikipedia that already state this fact and if she wasn't former Queen of Pakistan, try to get that page removed as your fellow educated Pakistani historians or on the subject matter will disagree with you. Also search up how the Queen Elizabeth also wore Pakistani symbols of both East AND West Pakistan on her dress for her coronation (do you even know what coronation is?). Stop WP:STALKING with you disruptive edits on subjects you have no clue about and confrontation (not only is abusive in real life) but also goes against WP:ETIQ lilpiglet 20:09, 14 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilpiglet (talk • contribs)
I only want you to comply with Wikipedia policies namely WP:RS, WP:V and WP:BURDEN before adding title Queen of Pakistan for her into that description. If you think there are ample sources on Wikipedia which gives her status of Queen of Pakistan please cite them here. Also i am not sure which page you are referring to which states her as Queen of Pakistan, i am sure that page would not have any reliable sources as well. Also, i do not care what she wore or did not because burden of proof WP:BURDEN is on the person who wants to add that information in the article and not on me so please provide a reliable source which clearly mentions her as Queen of Pakistan and i would not have any problem if you add that title for her and that would settle the matter. Moreover Wikipedia articles upon themselves are not reliable sources and they cannot be used for that purpose. Please stop abusing me and discuss the subject matter. Sajjad Altaf (talk) 20:38, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

His policies and opposition in East Pakistan missing

[edit]

Okay, the man was a serious buffoon. All the article does is glorify him as if he was some pro-American angel. Whereas he actually considered declaring Pakistan a monarchy. -Rainmaker23 (talk) 01:07, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Ayub Khan (general). 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}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 23:15, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Ayub Khan (general). 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) 20:44, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ayub Khan (President of Pakistan). 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) 01:39, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:43, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:21, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Indian islamophobic trolling

[edit]

This page has once again been targeted by Indian trolls, action must be taken to protect it and lock it. Zai97 (talk) 01:04, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:07, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

His spouse/wife?

[edit]

He has sons and grandsons that are still in the country's politics. But I can't find out who his wife was. Any info regarding this? Gotitbro (talk) 17:36, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Found an image of his wife as Begum Ayub Khan, no real name (begum is a title) but adding as such into the article. Gotitbro (talk) 20:47, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DISPUTING HIS MILITARY INVOLVEMENT IN WAZIRISTAN

[edit]

i find it confusing that he went against the waziristan rebellion. Does anyone have a source about his participation in the 1936 war in waziristan? — Preceding unsigned comment added by PreserveOurHistory (talk • contribs) 15:55, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 1 June 2024

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Closed as move per 3:1 support over oppose consensus. (non-admin closure) Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 11:18, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

– This article has been moved numerous times and it seems there's never been any discussion about it. The underlying issue appears to be that we have a set index article at the common name for this person. As this person is the primary topic, the solution is simple: move the set index article out of the way. Problem solved. I could have quite simply done a round-robin move but going through a formal move request, we can settle the issue once and for all. Schwede66 22:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, Ayub Khan is commonly used for him. Mehedi Abedin 09:09, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Muhammad Ayub Khan has 17,867 views but the actor has 10,039, Omar Ayub Khan has 8,549, Gohar Ayub Khan has 4,980, Ayub Khan Din has 585, the Emir of Afghanistan has 584, Sardar Muhammad Ayub Khan has 73 and Ayub Khan Ommaya has 4[[2]]. Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:43, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The former president is definitely the most historically significant person who is expected to have enduring prominence while the actors' prominence fluctuates.VR (Please ping on reply) 02:56, 3 June 2024 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ayub_Khan&oldid=1246151170"