Incidently, the votes for deletion page is only for requesting that an entire page be deleted: if you just want some information changed, you can plunge forward and do it yourself without having to ask permission!
I don't know why User:Sheely wants to move Pakistan to Central Asia, but barring major continental shift, it will have to be stuck in South Asia for now. There is no basis whatsoever for including it in Central Asia. It is to the east of the Himalayas and it is a member of the SAARC.
I rolled this back again. I would like to see this discussed first. In addition, I rolled back a change that said a filter was sufficient as a substitute for boiling water. To the best of my understanding, an RO filter is the only filter capable of filtering out most organisms, and that would be frightfully expensive in comparison to boiling. So I'm inclined to disbelieve this proposition too. -- Colin 03:13, 13 Jan 2006 (EST)
In my humble opinion the warning box, if it is really necessary, is in need of some serious rewriting. The first sentence is ambiguous, and there are two possible readings, none of which makes much sense.
One possible reading is that the threat is to American citizens in general, and is coming out of Pakistan. If this is what is intended, avoiding "non-essential travel" seems to be more of a way to punish Pakistan than a security measure to avoid risks to travellers. If that is the case, it is a political statement and has nothing to do on a page like this.
The other possible reading is that the threat is indeed to travellers who are American citizens, but only as they come out of Pakistan. This makes very little sense, but at least it might warrant a place on the page. Real risks to travellers is something worth warning about, amd do have a place on the page.
Apart from this, the wording of the warning is rather offensive, in its presupposition that everyone reading is naturally an American citizen. This is a matter of tone more than anything, but it is rather important.
There are indeed hostile feelings to American citizens among some people in Pakistan, though I don't know if e.g. Danish citizens might not fare quite as badly. Whether or not this is reason enough for discouraging all "non-essential" travel to the country is a different matter.
Rather than just rewrite it the way I would want it I thought I might start a discussion to bring up some more angles on it from the rest of you.
I very much agree, it's very vague and the threat is not great enough to warrant this harsh a warning... there are many Americans traveling and working in Pakistan, including myself... I've spent 4 months there collectively and haven't felt even a slight negative edge from anyone. I'm not proposing that it's completely safe, but the vast majority of Pakistanis like Americans, and many will tell you how much they want to visit the U.S. And with a few exceptions the areas of interest to tourists are safe... small precautions and advice can go in those relavent areas...
I propose a removal of the warning box altogether and updating the 'stay safe' section with something similar to:
While Pakistan is a fairly stable and welcoming country you should always seek advice about off-limits areas before coming.
Avoid at all costs anything even slightly resembling a protest, as these can become violent very quickly, as demonstrated by the Muhammad cartoon riots in Lahore and elsewhere, and Western interests and individuals are occasionally targeted.
Stay away from tribal areas and the sensitive Afghan border regions as the Pakistan goverment has little authority in these areas and cannot aid you in an emergency. If traveling in the south of the country seek advice from tourist offices and embassies about which areas are safe and not... travel to large portions of the southern states is not advisable or requires an armed escort.
Aside from the off-limit areas, keep your wits about you, avoid unecessary travel after dark, remain friendly, leave your preconceptions at the door and expect to meet some of the friendliest people on Earth.Cacahuate 03:33, 22 October 2006 (EDT)
I don't think it's very appropriate to link to a joke article in a proposed text for the stay safe section so I've delinked Earth. -- Andrew (Sapphire) 03:48, 22 October 2006 (EDT)
oops, I didn't actually look at it, just assumed there would be one... agreed... what do you think about the update though Andrew? Cacahuate 04:05, 22 October 2006 (EDT)
I like it - it's much more in depth than what's currently on the page. I don't think much discussion will be needed for changing the text out. -- Andrew (Sapphire) 04:55, 22 October 2006 (EDT)
Ok, I made the change... thanks Andrew! Cacahuate 07:36, 22 October 2006 (EDT)
I think the current situation in Pakistan is more and more unstable. I rewrote the stay safe section a bit and change the ones for the Lahorejan 04:48, 3 March 2009 (EST)
Why Balochistan is in the list which comprise more than half of Pakistani territory, what is the purpose of writing corruption is common practice in the stay safe, why i cant argue that kashmir is a part of india, How discussion can affect my personal safety, why kashmir border region is unsafe. It should be made clear that kashmir border region is off limit by the authorities User:Sal 07:18, 3 March 2009 (EST)
Wikitravel is based on consensus and discussion of issues
Don't simply revert changes of other wikitravelers especially twice. It is called edit warring and it doesn't strenghen your position in this community
Politeness is the way to make friends...
So now your questions
Why is Balochistan on the list? Balochistan is black listed/travel warning by most countries in the world (eg. Switzerland  it's only in German, French or Italian available). That is mainly due to the kidnapping of the head of the UNHCR office in Quetta and several uprises of tribal groups and violent separatist groups that attack infrastructure and administration
Why i write that corruption is common place? E.g. because Transparency International ( CPI 2008) does an annual study about world wide corruption and Pakistan came out 134. of 180 countries, that is bad and when you look around you will see that several other countries with equal bad ratings have similar comments
why i cant argue that kashmir is a part of india? India and Pakistan has fought three wars about Kashmir and it's still today one of the main obstacles for a lasting peace between these countries Conflict description on wikipedia My experience is that both Indians & Pakistanis get fast very emotional about that and that this make it is so difficult to make peace
How discussion can affect my personal safety? The discussion of Mohammed caricatures in 2006 quickly got out of control and violence erupted. Instead of acting very self-confident and ignore the racist/hate jerk from Denmark several people died. Also when discussions are fine why journalists in Pakistan are labelled by the President as "terroists"? 
Why Kashmir border region is unsafe? Even so (as youself stated) the region might be blocked by authorities, some travellers maybe not aware of that (Human genius is only ravelled by Human dumbness) If you like to adapt this part we may state that travellers need a permission to enter the region
I hope that answers your questions. Relax and have a great day, mate jan 03:21, 4 March 2009 (EST)
If UNHCR official is kidnapped from quetta than write quetta in that list, which is also arguable because in stay safe section we write about permanent safety issues not about kidnappings & thefts, And, because most of that state is absolutely safe, places like gwadar, omara are very important beach resorts.
stay safe section is not for corruption index because it has nothing to do with safety. but if you want to write about it than u need to write about it in every country stay safe section mentioned in that list, though i dont believe Transpareny int'l survey because they say it just based on perceptions, i just dont understand that from where they got funding from.
You need to mention it properly that foreigners are ban in kashmir border region by authorities but it is not for locals. User:Sal 05:21, 4 March 2009 (EST)
Travel warnings from the German  and British  foreign office state a clear warning of the whole Balochistan state/region (in case of Britain the northern & western part are especially named) and list the threats in other region in good detail. I will adapt the one especially for Quetta as you requested
Stay safe has something to do with corruption because it undermines significantly safety. E.g. you can't count on to be treated fair because a bribed administration will decide the outcome. If you would have looked a bit around you might have seen that in countries like Indonesia Indonesia#Corruption Wikitravellers have set up a whole paragraph in the stay safe section. Maybe we do it the same way like Indonesia. ok?
Agree & Done for Kashmir & regions
I don't understand why you are so keen to keep Balochistan of the list. Maybe you give some reason because even my Pakistani friends consider that area as very dangerous and don't travel in that region... jan 07:14, 4 March 2009 (EST)
One last issue, actually almost most countries have a comment on corruption in the stay safe section, where not feel free to add them. jan 07:36, 4 March 2009 (EST)
Jan, which economic protest turned violent? and the entire province of Balochistan is not dangerous as i had said earlier some of the very beautiful beaches are located there, and even you had said that warning written in english is about northern and western balochistan not the entire province and there is no history of violence in places like omara, pasni etc. your warning for the entire province can effect the tourism industry there, you can take this by example that, that province alone is more than 50% of pakistan by size and its population is 10mn, 95% of which lives in Quetta and its adjoing towns. About corruption, as i said earlier i dont agree with transparency int'l and consider it flawed organization, if you really are sincere and balanced than add corruption column in other travel guides also, if they dont remove it than i will not too......lol
Sal, please read to the end of the paragraph. Even so they especially mention the northern and western part, is states We advise against all non-essential travel to Quetta and other parts of Balochistan See:
"There is a heightened risk from kidnapping and militant activity in much of Balochistan. We advise against all travel to Northern Balochistan including the area from the border with NWFP down to the Sui/Dera Bugti area and west towards Quetta. We advise against travel to Western Balochistan in particular the areas bordering Afghanistan and Iran, including overland routes to and from these countries. We advise against all non-essential travel to Quetta and other parts of Balochistan. If you intend to visit these areas you should ensure that you have the necessary permission from the authorities and proper security arrangements in place."
I would define tourism as non-essentiell travel and therefore inform fellow travellers that the region is not as safe as it have been in the past. And I assume that even you agree Pakistan currently does not move in the direction of better safety and stability... And at wikitravel the traveller comes first!
You asked for economic protests that turned violent in Pakistan???? Try google and you find 253,000 hits you can select of...  or  for more recent article if you don't watch tv
Transparency International is one of the most respected independent Anti Corruption groups  and work closely with the UN and OECD (both see Pakistan on the lower end of transparency and high on corruption as well...) But why i have to prove you? Convince me! And by the way: Your insistence to put it in the Indian article gives a negative impression because it is simply retiliation (if you had a closer look you would have seen that the bribes topic is partially covered in the indian article under bakeesh...)
Take a break mate and add contructive ideas that match the real world we all live in. Regards, jan 11:30, 4 March 2009 (EST)
OK Jan, now let me do it in my way, because i think u have never been to pakistan and most fo your views are just based on perceptions, about the economic protest link that u provided, one of them is of political demonstration and other one is of a minor stock exchange protest which u are stereotyping, just for your information, it is easy to get permission to get into FATA upto khyber pass and many tourists still visit that pass as well as it is easy to get permission into Kashmir border region, one thing about kashmir, pak admin. kashmir is safe & there are no incidences of violence there but the situation is different in indian admin kashmir. I just want to ask u that if u have ever been to pakistan do u have paid any bribe. because transparency int'l surveys are based on peoples perceptions they say it, select 5,4,3,2,1, and i usually believe that they dont do real surveys and your writing abt. corruption here increased that perception. as far as on Balochistan issue your are putting that state in a list which says dont go there for any reason any time without specifically mentioning what travel advisory actually says, it also means that u write Balochistan there just based on your perceptions not reality because even that official advisory which is the only piece of evidence you have says 'If you intend to visit these areas you should ensure that you have the necessary permission from the authorities and proper security arrangements in place and they also specifically mention north and western parts, report me of violence in that state other than north and west, which also dont occur daily but occassionally, the rest i do agree with you thats y u need to cooperate with me. Sal 12:90, 5 March 2009 (EST)
Sal, I had the misfortune that in January my flight to Delhi was diverted to Lahore due to fog and the following closure of the Delhi airport... And I must admit that we received a frosty welcome at the airport and instead of "welcome to Pakistan" the first word of the Pakistani airport representative was yelled : "no photos" To cut a long story short: I was rather happy to leave Pakistan because i didn't feel welcome. I discussed my experiences with friends from Karachi who told me that usually people are politer.
I think the text as rewritten by user cacahute is fine and it should stay that way. jan 04:17, 5 March 2009 (EST)
Jan, First, if u have problems from me for not being polite than i must tell u that i live alone and even when i travel i dont make friends so im like that because i dont talk, secondly, if u have bad experience in pakistan than i think u must try visit in Wiki travel guide on Northern Pakistan because if u go there u will fall in love with the landscape and the people there, secondly, i was not impressed with your views on balochistan, because my 6th sense told me that u have some indian roots because indian media usually create misunderstandings about that place and now i think i m right on that but still u had added the word (often) in Balochistan, anyways im sorry for not being polite and i must thank u for thinking that the text written by cacahute is fine and i also don't have problems with that text. Sal 05:11, 5 March 2009 (EST)
Yay, consensus rules! I didn't mention Quetta here because I think that notes about that belong more on the quetta page and the balochistan page. And for what it's worth, Pakistan is probably the most friendly country I've ever visited (well, second to Bangladesh, which is almost irritatingly so), Jan I hope you give it a second shot sometime! I took out the corruption section mostly because it wasn't really saying much, it was a broad statement that "Pakistan is corrupt" and I don't think it's relevant to the traveler. A bit of price gouging may be encountered, but it's not substantial enough to warrant talk in the stay safe section on the Pakistan page. Thanks for not getting tooooo ugly guys.... – cacahuatetalk 11:39, 5 March 2009 (EST)
Great to see consensus achieved and thanks for the mediator work cacahuate! Sal: I'm born and raised in the western part of Berlin, Germany see User_talk:Jc8136/Archives#Just_realized_something on a discussion about that some three years ago. I now live for almost eight years near Zurich. I only travel for business purposes to India and I'm well aware that both sides have strong opinions (i don't share). Being raised on the front line of the cold war rises the awareness that live is to short to spread hate... Have a wonderful long weekend mates jan 13:01, 5 March 2009 (EST)
According to Newsweek, Pakistan is the most dangerous country on earth. The only safe place in Pakistan is Islamabad. The remaining country is unsafe for all westerners, especially non-Muslim typical white skinned people from Americas and Europe. Just like the US and European countries have special government agents looking for possible terrorists, the al-Qaeda agents are doing the same type of work in Pakistan.--Creative 21:10, 22 October 2007 (EDT)
Political "dangerousness" (from an American viewpoint) and personal safety are not the same thing. North Korea is incredibly dangerous to its neighboring countries, but perfectly safe to visit as a tourist.
As for personal safety, I'd think twice before going into the NWFP, but the rest of the country isn't much worse than (say) India. Also, Islamabad has had its fair share of bombings, so I'm not sure why you consider it "safe"... Jpatokal 22:36, 22 October 2007 (EDT)
You are right that the country as a whole is generally safe but there are many extremists or anti-westerners among the ordinary Pakistani people. Those extremists may target westerners because of the recent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as the war between Israel and Lebanon and a possible war with Iran. These people may think that all westerners are spies. But I know majority of the ordinary Pakistani people don't have any issues with western tourists or travellers.--Creative 00:13, 28 October 2007 (EDT)
I'm going on a trip to India this summer and was thinking of taking a side trip to Pakistan. It would probably be just a few days in Lahore, but everyone I've talked to says even that is too risky. What do travellers think? Also, are rural areas safer than Lahore? The recent terrorist attacks there are making me nervous... 18.104.22.168 04:04, 5 April 2010 (EDT)
Hi, I just reverted some changes to the visa info that I don't think was all that useful, and was messying up the article. I think when the visa exceptions are that obscure then what was already written (that most nationalities require visas) is good enough... the few exceptions that exist will find out who they are when they contact the embassy, we don't need to describe each and every possible scenario... for instance, I could probably count on one hand the number of visitors to Pakistan from Trinidad & Tobago for the whole of last year. - Cacahuate 03:43, 18 February 2007 (EST)
Alright you win, but I rewrote the section for a little more coherency. Thanks for the new info! I'm glad to see they're easing visa restrictions, but I was hoping when this finally happened it wouldn't be such an unveiled attempt at directly making money... what's with having to travel in a group to get the visas on arrival?!?! That's bogus, Musharraf. - Cacahuate 12:59, 18 February 2007 (EST)
Hey there WorldTraveler, I reverted back to the older version... the religion and language figures come from the current CIA World factbook, and Indians can now apply for 30 day tourist visas if they travel in a tour group, which was previously only 14 days... all of the new visa relaxations are listed on the official tourism website- Cacahuate 20:43, 19 February 2007 (EST)
Salaam aleikum Ajmal ji... no offense, I understand you're proud of Quetta, and I think it is in some ways a beautiful city. But summing it up as a "large and beautiful city" is turning a blind eye to things that the traveler should know. Wouldn't you agree that it has more of an edge to it than say, Islamabad? Not to mention that it's making news quite a bit lately as a haven for the Taliban. I hesitate to write that into the article because that would be causing tooo much undue fear... but some wording that conveys that it isn't entirely calm/safe I think is appropriate.
So, I've changed it from unruly to "a large, beautiful and slightly unruly city". Can we compromise on that? I think that's a fair description, don't you? – cacahuatetalk 21:44, 23 May 2007 (EDT)
Ramadan is not the Holiday, Do u know the meaning of a Holiday.........
Better than you do. Jpatokal 04:28, 4 June 2007 (EDT)
Ramadan matches my definition of a Holiday. -- Colin 14:12, 4 June 2007 (EDT)
While it might technically not be a holiday in the sense that Eid-ul Fitr is a holiday, it's definitely holiday-like, and greatly affects visitors to Pakistan and other Muslim countries, so it should definitely be mentioned here. Please don't remove it again without discussing it here first. Thanks! – cacahuatetalk 16:25, 4 June 2007 (EDT)
The meaning of the word 'Holiday' is "Leisure time away from work; devoted to rest or pleasure; A day on which work is suspended by law or custom; its synonym is Vacation; but in Ramadan all Schools, businesses are opened not closed so its definitely not a Holiday, You can discuss about Ramadan in any other title but please not in Holidays, I hope you will remove Ramadan from Holidays your self. -- 14:12, 7 June 2007 (EDT)
Right, but this is a travel guide, not a dictionary or encyclopedia... the purpose of a "Holiday" section in the travel guides is to inform visitors about days and times that will possibly affect them while they are visiting a place. Ramadan fits that description. – cacahuatetalk 02:57, 7 June 2007 (EDT)
That's just one definition. Here's a quote from WikiPedia:Holiday: When translated from/to other languages, the meanings of the word "holiday" may be conflated with "observance" and "celebration". In this instance, we're conflating. Please trust those of us who are fluent in English when we say it is not disrespectful, misleading, or inaccurate to call Ramadan a holiday. -- Colin 13:11, 7 June 2007 (EDT)
Shouldn't the warning talk about the war taking place in the western part of the country? Between government forces and tribal groups. 22.214.171.124 04:55, 24 January 2008 (EST)
The "Stay safe" section of the article mentions that, that's the more permanent section for travel warnings. the warning box up top is only there due to the current unrest... the Waziristan stuff is unlikely to affect travelers, nobody's headed there anyhow, and it's a tiny slice of the country – cacahuatetalk 03:03, 26 January 2008 (EST)
The information that was previously given by Wikitravel was misleading on the visa subject Mr. Cacahuate (Senor Peanut :-) ). I edited this information to give a real account of the visa experience in New Delhi. I saw that it was objected to as a rant, and I removed a lot of first person references and some of the more opinion based statements, although I completely standby them.
The reason I felt compelled to use such srong statements was to lead people correctly on their decision to get this visa in India, considering the relative ease of getting the visa in the US (not to mention the lower price). When I read the visa article on wikitravel and Lonely Planet before coming to India, I decided to get my Pakistan visa in New Delhi. The amount of sugar-coating and misinformation in these sources was unhelpful and resulted in an extra four days (due to Deshara) of my time being spent sorting out the visa when it would have been more convenient and cheaper to next-day the application to D.C. in time for my trip. Travelers should NOT make this mistake in the future, and I want to help people who, like all of the foreigners I met at the embassy, would be completely bewildered by the entire visa process at the High Commission. Similarly, I would appreciate it if Pakistan would clean up their act in Delhi. They could be like the Kazakhstan embassy in New Delhi where a person can go in person, wait in an air-conditioned lobby, pay Rs. 1500 ON THE SPOT for a dual entry visa (Rs. 1000 for single-entry), give one handwritten form to the clerk, and then return 2 days later to collect the passport.
As un citoyen du monde, I am vehemenantly opposed to visa fees and uncomfortable embassy processes when the normal citizens of almost every country are the beneficiaries of a healthy tourism industry. Similarly, one could ask how cultural understanding can increase when governments make it needlessly difficult to enter/exit their countries. This is especially true in the developing world where travellers are often put off traveling there due to security concerns and/or ignorance of available facility standards.
Well, I surely understand how frustrating bureaucracy can be, I've encountered a fair share myself, but I don't think that it's extraordinarily difficult there, any more so than any other government encounter in that neck of the woods.... Anyway I think it's best to keep it short and just to the main points, since the process can vary a lot by person and nationality.... yes it might take a couple days.... but it can also be incredibly quick and avail next day, which was my experience the first time I went.... and that was with pretty much no previous information, just following instructions once I arrived there the first day. The next encounter took an extra day since a meeting with the HC was required.... but that's a case by case thing. All the other stuff about the quality of the facilities etc isn't relevant, and won't bug many people.... it's part of the experience, I kind of like the place now :) – cacahuatetalk 21:20, 11 October 2009 (EDT)
The flood did not kill thousands - it killed hundreds, but the flood waters are standing or receding. They are not moving/flooding new areas, thus I believe they do not pose a threat to a tourist anymore. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 126.96.36.199 (talk • contribs)
I think the death toll was certainly over a thousand. Anyway, please plunge forward. --inas 17:04, 16 December 2010 (EST)
At some stage it should presumably be renamed as Khyber Pakhtunkhwa ? Not sure how familiar that name yet is to the average traveler? Until this discussion is resolved, please do not use the name Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. In the meantime I have put a redirect in place --Burmesedays 04:58, 30 May 2011 (EDT)
I've plunged and made the change. It's at that name for years now, and it's widely used. --globe-trotter 04:39, 16 September 2011 (EDT)
Previously "Jazz Mobile" was registered on this page as a mobile operator is Pakistan. Pleaes note that Jazz is a brand from Mobilink (a cell phone operator itself). It would be unfair to other mobile operators in Pakistan to advertize one company's package among the main telecom companies. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 188.8.131.52 (talk • contribs) 08:01, 9 July 2013 (UTC)