Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on February 10, 2005, February 10, 2006, February 10, 2007, and July 30, 2010.

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

Iraq Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iraq, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Iraq 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.IraqWikipedia:WikiProject IraqTemplate:WikiProject IraqIraq articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Arab world High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arab world, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Arab world 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.Arab worldWikipedia:WikiProject Arab worldTemplate:WikiProject Arab worldArab world articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Former countries: Ottoman Empire This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles This article is supported by WikiProject Ottoman Empire. Cities: Core / National capitals 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles This article is on the project's core list. This article is supported by the project's national capital taskforce.

To-do: E · H · W · R Updated 2006-10-30 Improve this previous CotW article to featured-standard so that it can be nominated and featured. Reasonable History section, but Sights and monuments, Business, Geography, Culture and Demographics are too short both miles and kilometers are used to describe distances in the article, it would make more sense to use just one Priority 1 (top)

Archives

1

Can someone make a map of which areas are Sunni and which are Shia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.58.206.209 (talk) 00:30, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Baghdad article is being simply Biased because if you read it carefully you'll immediately notice the Persian nationalistic unfluence on it which is incorrect & manipulated..the name persian is mentioned more than Baghdad, Iraq & Arabic...& by fact Iraq is officially an Arabic country & all this persian propaganda is unnessecary & unacceptable by the Iraqi population...& this accounts for other Iraqi- & Arabic-related articles being manipulated throughout Wikipedia....even in the Iran related articles things are being manipulated in the way that everything is being changed to persian to serve the persian nationalistic intentions even though Iran has lots of Arabic influence on it...,unfortunately Wikipedia is not trustful anymore. Iraswe —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.6.158.33 (talk) 13:45, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone add information, if it is known somewhere, about the cities exiting where Baghdad now is before it became Baghdad?

The oldest Babylonian document in which the name of this city was mentioned goes back to the time of the famous King Hammurabi (1792 - 1750 BC), the sixth king of the first Babylonian dynasty. The name Baghdad was repeated in the era following the era of Schorr , Urkunden ... , No. 197, p.7: vbil (1) 203 The first dynasty of Babylon, which is the era known in the history of ancient Iraq as the “Ki” or “Kashish” era (1500 - 1117 BC!), the oldest of which is in the frontier room (Kuru) (Kuduru). From the era of the Kashi king “Nazi Martash” (1341-1316 BC), and that it is near the King’s River “Nar-Shri”, and the city of Baghdado or “Baghdad” was repeatedly mentioned in the cuneiform texts of the following eras, including some Assyrian documents between The thirteenth century BC. And the ninth century BC. ( 1 ) مصطفى محمد ٣٠٥ (talk) 00:50, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2000+ years of history and culture, and half the article is about the last few years?! There's more about recent gallop polls than about the civilization that called Baghdad home for more than a millenia. Ugh, this is why Wikipedia is laughed at... Spookfish 06:26, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, this article is pitiful. We must have some pictures of Baghdad where the city isn't on fire... Coffee 07:57, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. WTF is this article? There is one sentence about the 300 year Ottoman rule! 76.172.64.179 04:18, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, i agree with you. Baghdad was there before 2000 and recent events are too much explained whereas the real history and roots of this town are not there. And, I think that the term of "Invasion of Iraq" is not appropriate. I think "Liberation of Iraq" would be better.

I think I can add a good etymology section to the article (about the name Baghdad and its origins). I'll try to get it done this weekend.--Zereshk 21:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused as to how bagh means god...i can think of many owrds in persian, but bagh is not one of them. if anything, bagh means garden, but with the alef. Kızılderili 22:43, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The word Baghdad is frequently used throughout the American media, however it is ALWAYS mispronounced as "bag-dad". Can Wikipedia help (even more) by adding a sound-bite with the proper pronunciation on the main page? -- 192.231.106.2 00:53, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my future post #Bardad? Bagdat? פשוט pashute ♫ (talk) 15:46, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The main image at the top of the page (Image:Baghdad.jpg) was a copyright violation from www.robinhocker.com, and has been deleted. You may want to find another suitable image. Proto||type 14:54, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is it OK if I add an image?Bless sins 21:05, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

and who does it say is "mayor's bitch?" omg —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.29.211.22 (talk • contribs) .

Rather than using just miles or kilometres (as the 'to do' list suggests), it would be useful to use both but in a structured way throughout. For example, X is 13 km (8 miles) from Y. Excluding on measurement would alienate some of the readership.

EVOCATIVEINTRIGUE TALKTOME | EMAILME | IMPROVEME 14:02, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a source for the British using gas attacks to pacify the Iraqis in the 20s? Cos I saw a TV programme which mentioned this once, and it was lambasting the British for hypocrisy because of this, but it said they only PLANNED to use gas, before cancelling because it was too expensive... Indigenius 13:32, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Uum.. since when was baghdad called "penis heads" and nicknamed the "garden of poop"?

Attempting to change..

Sillyness on this page.

Wait, do you mean it being edited to say fadge? -Guy Person-

I do not comprehend that comment; but, it is not signed.

[[ hopiakuta | [[ [[%c2%a1]] [[%c2%bf]] [[ %7e%7e%7e%7e ]] -]] 00:23, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cbs claims peace in this neighborhood: Christian; Sunni; Shiite.

[[ hopiakuta | [[ [[%c2%a1]] [[%c2%bf]] [[ %7e%7e%7e%7e ]] -]] 00:23, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly there is a mistake on the page regarding Baghdad's compostion; it states that the city is comprised of 60% shia when infact it should be 40% according to several reliable sources. 20:47, 02 March 2008

approximately 6,554,126 inhabitants? After or before the detonation of a bomb? Sorry, but such an accurate approximation is, especially in the case of Baghdad, simply ridiculous - or shall I say stupid? --W-j-s (talk) 00:37, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any objective evidence that the city was the most populous in the world during any period?Royalcourtier (talk) 22:08, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The account of the British occupation of Iraq in the twenties/thirties is very one-sided! I have changed one patent inaccuracy - the Gernam bombing of London and other British and French targets during the First World War - not to mention retalitory bombing by the allies - was targetted essentially at civilian morale, so that the British (for all their sins) cannot be justly accused of introducing "terror" bombing to the world (at least not in Iraq). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.139.79.82 (talk) 00:33, 16 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

The third opening paragraph seems to have been partially deleted, but I can't find a version of the article with the full paragraph...can anyone else figure this out? Super Jedi Droid 20:56, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted more info on the 2nd massacre of Baghdad, but this article barely mentions it at all (the June 1401 seizure & massacre, under the army of Timur). Harvard yarrd

We have WP:UE policy. Any doubts that the English name for the city is well established and it is Baghdad? I have move protected the article Alex Bakharev 23:55, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The term doesn't describe what's going on in Baghdad and I'm not sure where it was sourced. Sectarian violence is probably better. Matt Sanchez 03:45, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many people have described what has happened in Baghdad as "ethnic cleansing." For example, veteran journalist Patrick Cockburn, who has a forthcoming book on the Iraq war, stated earlier this month: "the fall in the death rate is partly because ethnic cleansing has already done its grim work and in much of Baghdad there are no mixed areas left."[1] Siberian Husky (talk) 13:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree ethnic cleansing is the proper term.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 12:01, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was just on Haifa street where the situation has improved drastically. Matt Sanchez 03:47, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This section is an absolute joke. Who put this in there and where was it sourced? I've seen NO plans to use solar power beside the scant use of it for street lamps, and even those lamps glow more than light. Renewable electricity and energy is not a priority anywhere in several very wealthy Middle Eastern cities with great security situations. The conservation global warming hysteria is very much a Western construct. Matt Sanchez 03:51, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could we please have those damn coordinates as real text so they are easy to copy! instead of this floating over it all pop design. --IceHunter 01:48, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should we say Although there is dispute over its Iranian origin, or should we say Although there is dispute over its Persian origin? Mussav (talk) 07:50, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Read Iranian languages, the dispute is about weather it's Kurdish or Persian, both of which are classified as Iranian languages, so there is no dispute about the Iranian origin of the name.--07fan (talk) 14:55, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

about the dispute of course there is a dispute, it is either "god-given" "God's gift" or "The Given Garden" but we all agree it's Iranian name so no need to add a source, you will ruin the paragraph beside it wasn't a real source, it should be a direct link ;) Mussav (talk) 19:22, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The beginning of this section includes one of the most disastrous run-on sentences I have ever seen. I am just browsing, but perhaps someone involved in this page will repair it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.87.70.194 (talk) 21:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was "just browsing" as well, but Ive noticed there's no any comment about the loot of the Baghdag's museum, once defined as comparable to the sack of Constantinople. I dont know if there's something that could be done about this, but without that info the articule is simply uncomplete or biased --Oszalał (talk) 19:25, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The 2 level bridge was actually built in the mid 1990s by Saddam's government, you can see an image of the bridge on the reverse of the 50 dinars dated 1995. No new bridges were built in Baghdad since 2003!

I'm a bit confused. The Baghdad Governate page, here, says that the governate is both a province and a city. This page seems to say that there is an actual Baghdad City apart from the governate. What is the square mileage/kilometers of only the City of Baghdad? --Criticalthinker (talk) 01:42, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This list seems to split the governorate in two parts, Amant Baghdad (or Amanat Baghdad, as other sources spell it) (pop. 5,345,099 in 2005, all urban) and Baghdad outskirts (combined urban + rural pop. 1,438,888 in 2005). But, I don't know if this is a definition mainly for planning purposes or if it has any administrative functions. This Mayorality of Baghdad page says that the governorate is the same as the city. Well, it actually says that the governorate became a city in 1987, so I am not sure what its status is really (governorate, or city at governorate level?). Anyway, I haven't seen any area figures mentioned for the Amanat Baghdad area. Another way of defining the central Baghdad area is by the urban population of the Baghdad governorate, which also includes urban population outside the Amanat Baghdad area, having an estimated total population of 5,906,610 in 2005 and 6,049,276 in 2006. But, the sources don't say if this is a continuous area or consist of several urban places that's not connected with each other.--Pjred (talk) 08:20, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The official Baghdad City (or Amanat area) consists of 9 districts and 89 neighborhoods. The Baghdad Governorate technically includes only the outer 6 districts (Abu Ghuraib, Mahmoudiya, Mada'in, Al Istiqlal, Al Tarmiya, and Al Taji). However, the Amanat is currently administered as part of Baghdad Governorate. 128.36.27.91 (talk) 19:46, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I just recently discovered that the city and governorate exist as one entity, now. So, both the population listed on the city and governorate page should be the same. Could someone nail down the square mileage of the governorate, though? Both of the pages currently show something different. --Criticalthinker (talk) 06:25, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This COSIT page says that the area of the Baghdad governorate was 4,843 sq.km in 2003. It seems however, from the information in the Baghdad and Baghdad Governorate articles, that there has been some changes in boundaries after 2003, at least within the governorate. The governorate article lists an area of 4,071 sq.km, but don't mention a source for this. --Pjred (talk) 07:21, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, they're not one entity. There are 9 qada in the Amanat (city of Baghdad) and 6 qada that are outside the city but in the governorate. --Polaron | Talk 13:10, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, they are governed as one entity. After much research, I've discovered that while there may be statistical divisions, municipally, the city and province are the same thing. City proper pages on wiki are for the government area unless we state specifically that we're only talking about an urban agglomeration. If this page is for the conurbation, we need to state that, specifically. --Criticalthinker (talk) 02:38, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes because the city council was dissolved after the 2005 elections. There is no city government. There is only a governorate council. So in this case, the city proper does not have a government. But the traditional city (amanat) is not coextensive with the governorate. This situation may still change as the new constitution specifies that the amanat is a special area. --Polaron | Talk 12:11, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

what about transportation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.234.173.28 (talk) 20:31, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image in the sidebar that is captioned "The location of Baghdad within Iraq." shows a central Baghdad streetplan, not the location of the city in the country. --90.218.44.26 (talk) 09:34, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hip hop —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.116.122.59 (talk) 01:49, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that the governor of Baghdad, Iraq has no Wikipedia page. That surprises me. Someone should create it and I will drastically improve it. --JHawk88 | Talk 12:11, 07 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I came to this article to see if I could find out what the percentages of the various religious groups in Baghdad were. But I haven't found that, instead there seems to be no mention at all of the different religions. Indeed I couldn't even see any info on the conflict going on in the City. I was trying to figure out whether Baghdad is a predominantly Sunni or Shi’a city (or if its half and half, or something), this seems like pretty basic information to me. Why is this simply left out? --Hibernian (talk) 05:15, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think Baghdad as the Capital of Iraq, harbors people from all over Iraq. I am not sure but it might quite well reflect the ethno-religious composition of the whole Iraq which is roughly 60 procent *mainly Arab speaking) Shiites, 15% Sunnis Arabs, 20% Sunni Kurds 5% otheres (mainly Assyrians).--Babakexorramdin (talk) 01:17, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but that still doesn't really solve anything, it's not in the article. There is not even a single mention of what has happened in Baghdad since the War. No mention of the Sunni-Shia civil war, no mention of even a single bombing or massacre, etc. What's going go? I can only assume that there is some deliberate attempt to keep this sort of thing off the page. Maybe it's too controversial or something? --Hibernian (talk) 05:13, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Information on religions is under the heading of 'Demographics'. Demographic data come from censuses. If census data is non-existent, unreliable, or doesn't include information on religion, then it's hard to build this into the article. For example, the Wikipedia article on Beijing also has no breakdown of religions. Not every country collects that information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2407:7000:9B8C:5A00:3CE3:58E0:3ED5:AF38 (talk) 00:19, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That is all I have to say on this matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.30.105.83 (talk) 22:28, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the discussion of the Baghdad Zoo, L. Paul Bremer is erroneously described as the "Viceroy of Iraq." I have found no reference to this as a legitimate title in the U.S.'s civilian administration of Iraq, and do not doubt that it was included in the article to editorialize. His official title should be changed to "Director of Reconstruction."(http://www.nndb.com/people/289/000023220/) 192.75.254.150 (talk) 17:27, 7 May 2010 (UTC)StefanH.[reply]

Is the city composed of "two semicircles of 19 km in diameter", or "a circle about 2 km in diameter"? The article contains both figures. Augurar (talk) 10:59, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Bias in stating it is often the location of terrorist attacks considering these terrorist attacks are more recent, suggest change to state that in recent years it has been the subject of terrorist attacks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.134.244 (talk) 18:41, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

the city have two ancient cities :

• the old city in the eastern side of Tigris river.
• the Round city in the western side of Tigris river.

פארוק (talk) 22:54, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

the article says..."The population of Baghdad as of 2011 is approximately 7,216,040, making it the most populous city in the country. It is also the largest city in Iraq," That is silly, since the "country" in mind here IS Iraq, so it is not ALSO the largest city in Iraq, since it was just stated to be the largest city in Iraq by using the words "in the country"!!!!!! Geesh.......

It is all rather confusing: in the opening section it says "The population of Baghdad, as of 2016, is approximately 8,765,000". Then, in section Demographics the article states "Baghdad's population was estimated at 7.22 million in 2015". How can the population grow with 1.5 million people in one year?? --Gerard1453 (talk) 18:04, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Where are they? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.128.18.191 (talk) 06:49, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If it's true that "The name has been found as Baghdadu on Assyrian cuneiform records of the 9th century BC, and on Babylonian bricks bearing the Royal Seal of King Nebuchadnezzar (6th century BC)" then what's said below about the name originating from two Middle Persian words cannot be correct (no one spoke Middle Persian till 1000 years after Nebuchadnezzar's time). So, if it's true, the rest of the etymology section needs to be revised, but first we need a better source for it than atlastours.net. Other encyclopedia articles about Baghdad that I can find do not make this claim. Andrew Dalby 11:56, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I put some structure to "Further Reading", I hope it's o.k.. --R. la Rue (talk) 22:41, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content. Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 16:26, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Baghdad. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add ((cbignore)) after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add ((nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot)) to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071212142736/http://www.kcentv.com:80/news/c-article.php?cid=5&nid=235 to http://www.kcentv.com/news/c-article.php?cid=5&nid=235
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081220055610/http://www.arcadd.com:80/baghdad-cbd.htm to http://www.arcadd.com/baghdad-cbd.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150114174314/http://csmonitor.com/2003/0716/p01s04b-woiq.htm to http://csmonitor.com/2003/0716/p01s04b-woiq.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:31, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The claim that the name "Baghdad" - or earlier versions - were used as far back as 2000 BC does not have any proper sources. The "sources" used in this article include a book named "The Woman I Loved" and two very old articles, one from 1899 and one from 1912. None of these sources actually passes WP:SOURCE. According to the authoritative Encyclopaedia of Islam (which is also cited in this article), the name is "undoubtedly Iranian". --Lysozym (talk) 15:47, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Lysozym: write a revised and well-weighted etymology section.--111.255.10.49 (talk) 12:29, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The oldest Babylonian document in which the name of this city was mentioned goes back to the time of the famous King Hammurabi (1792 - 1750 BC), the sixth king of the first Babylonian dynasty. The name Baghdad was repeated in the era following the era of Schorr , Urkunden ... , No. 197, p.7: vbil (1) 203 The first dynasty of Babylon, which is the era known in the history of ancient Iraq as the “Ki” or “Kashish” era (1500 - 1117 BC!), the oldest of which is in the frontier room (Kuru) (Kuduru). From the era of the Kashi king “Nazi Martash” (1341-1316 BC), and that it is near the King’s River “Nar-Shri”, and the city of Baghdado or “Baghdad” was repeatedly mentioned in the cuneiform texts of the following eras, including some Assyrian documents between The thirteenth century BC. And the ninth century BC. ( 1 ) مصطفى محمد ٣٠٥ (talk) 00:48, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Baghdad may have been a cultural centre during the periods of Islamic ascendancy, but it doubt that it can be said that it "regained some of its former prominence as a significant center of Arab culture" after the independence of Iraq. It takes more than independence to make a city a significant cultural centre.Royalcourtier (talk) 22:10, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Baghdad. 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/20110723160013/https://admin.iraqupdates.net/p_articles.php/article/35631 to http://admin.iraqupdates.net/p_articles.php/article/35631
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120118121401/https://faculty.washington.edu/modelski/CAWC.htm to https://faculty.washington.edu/modelski/CAWC.htm
• Added ((dead link)) tag to http://climexp.knmi.nl/data/pa40650_yr.txt
• Added ((dead link)) tag to http://climexp.knmi.nl/data/tspa40650.txt
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.aaco.org/airlines_iraqi.asp
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.naec.go.jp/kaigai/jmideast.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060212064817/https://archnet.org:80/library/sites/one-site.tcl?site_id=7592 to http://archnet.org/library/sites/one-site.tcl?site_id=7592
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090828185553/https://www.globalpost.com:80/dispatch/iraq/090824/behind-baghdads-9-11 to http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/iraq/090824/behind-baghdads-9-11

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 16:49, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Baghdad. 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 ((dead link)) tag to http://seenjeem.maktoob.com/question?category_id=4&level=L2&question_id=9510
• Added ((dead link)) tag to http://egabat.google.com/ejabat/thread?tid=6981074380f32f74
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100929173506/http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5huPkYk4bGVvo1Sa1tWeH-tgENiFw to http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5huPkYk4bGVvo1Sa1tWeH-tgENiFw
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120106135651/http://www.climatetemp.info/iraq/baghdad.html to http://www.climatetemp.info/iraq/baghdad.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081228064722/http://www.defendamerica.mil:80/articles/june2005/a060105la2.html to http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/june2005/a060105la2.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081227233739/http://www.defendamerica.mil:80/articles/mar2004/a031804d.html to http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/mar2004/a031804d.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081228012249/http://www.defendamerica.mil:80/articles/sept2006/a091906dg2.html to http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/sept2006/a091906dg2.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110215083622/http://www.alnaserairlines.com:80/contact-us.htm to http://www.alnaserairlines.com/contact-us.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100627162352/http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0102-04.htm to http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0102-04.htm

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 03:31, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

When reading this article, I noticed two parts of it that seemed to be repeating information from earlier parts, and also seemed to be perhaps (partially) inaccurate and/or in the wrong place. However, I didn't feel knowledgeable enough on this topic to fix these issues, so I'll outline them here in the hopes that someone else can and will. The first part that I found had issues was the following pair of sentences from the "Golden Gate Palace" subsection: "The roundness points to the fact that it was based on Arabic script. The two designers who were hired by Al-Mansur to plan the city's design were Naubakht, a Zoroastrian who also determined that the date of the foundation of the city would be astrologically auspicious, and Mashallah, a Jew from Khorasan, Iran." The second part was the entire "Abbasids and the round city" subsection which immediately follows those sentences.

My issues with the two sentences I quoted are:

• They seem to be about the roundness and construction of the city, not about the Golden Gate Palace, and thus seem as though they should instead be in the "Foundation" section, where there is other information about the roundness and construction of the city, as well as about those designers.
• The second sentence, on the "designers", seems to be written as if it is not the case that there is already mention a few paragraphs above, in the "Foundation" section, that "July was chosen as the starting time because two astrologers, Naubakht Ahvazi and Mashallah, believed that the city should be built under the sign of the lion, Leo." These sentences have very similar content to each other, and it seems as though they should be merged, especially as the sentence in the "Golden Gate Palace" section doesn't seem like it belongs there anyway.
• It seems possibly inaccurate or misleading to say those two people were "The two designers who were hired by Al-Mansur to plan the city's design" (emphasis added), because the idea that just two people by themselves designed the whole city seems implausible, and further it contradicts "Mansur assembled engineers, surveyors, and art constructionists from around the world to come together and draw up plans for the city. Over 100,000 construction workers came to survey the plans; many were distributed salaries to start the building of the city." It's very possible that those two people were among the designers, or even the most important of them, but not the only ones.

However, unfortunately I'm not at all an expert on any of the relevant areas of history, and I haven't got or read the books cited as sources. I was tempted to change or remove these sentences, but I don't feel confident doing so given my lack of knowledge. It's definitely the case that either the "The two designers..." sentence or the "Mansur assembled..." sentences are at least partly misleading, given that they contradict each other, and it seems to me quite likely that the latter is more accurate, but I don't really know precisely what actually happened, so I don't know what changes to make. Further, it's possible that the real mistake is that all of that was meant to refer to the Golden Gate Palace. Then it wouldn't be contradictory, nor seemingly implausible, to say that just those two people had planned it, and it would make sense for the information to be there.

I just don't know what the mistake is. As such, I'd be very grateful if someone who does know more, or has access to the relevant books and is willing to consult the cited pages, would go in and change what's mistaken, which may be as simple as moving the "The roundness points to..." sentence to the "Foundation" section (I assume that sentence is accurate, just misplaced, though again it may have been meant to refer to the roundness of the palace, not the city; I just don't know) and deleting the sentences on "The two designers...".

My issues with the "Abbasids and the round city" subsection are somewhat similar, namely:

• That section seems to repeat information mentioned earlier (e.g., proximity to Ctesiphon) for no clear purpose.
• It seems just a jumble of information; I don't know how the sentences are meant to be linked together or why this information is being provided here.
• "The Abbasids considered themselves the inherittures and the need of Mansur to place the capital in a place that was representative of Arab-Islamic identity by building the House of Wisdom, where ancient texts were translated from their original language, such as Greek, to Arabic" does not make grammatical sense; it seems to be one sentence (up to "inherittures") and then a sentence fragment.
• Furthermore, "inherittures" is not a word; presumably it's a misspelling of "inheritors".
• It's unclear how building the House of Wisdom has anything to do with the need to place the capital in a certain type of location. That's a totally separate matter, isn't it?

But in this case, I was able to find an earlier version (from 8 November 2011) of this page that seems to provide some insight into what went wrong (I tried for the other sentences but it was essentially all the same back to 8 November 2011 and I wouldn't have known what to make of it anyway so I gave up). On 8 November 2011, the subsection read:

The Abbasid Caliphate was based on their being the descendants of the uncle of Muhammad and being part of the Quraysh tribe. They used Shi'a resentment, Khorasanian movement, and appeals to the ambitions and traditions of the newly conquered Persian aristocracy to overthrow the Umayyads. The Abbasids sought to combine the hegemony of the Arabic tribes with the imperial, court, ceremonial, and administrative structures of the Persians. The Abbasids considered themselves the inheritors of two traditions: the Arabian-Islamic (bearers of the mantle of Muhammad) and the Persian (successors to the Sassanid monarchs).

These two things are evident from the construction, which is modeled after Persian structures and the need of Mansur to place the capital in a place that was representative of Arab-Islamic identity by building the House of Wisdom, where ancient texts were translated from their original language, such as Greek, to Arabic. Mansur is credited with the "Translation Movement" for this. Further, Baghdad is also near the ancient Sassanid imperial seat of Ctesiphon on the Tigris River.

This seemed to clear up some of the issues relating to grammar, lack of coherence or connection between ideas, reason for repeating information (e.g., now the proximity to the ancient Persian city is relevant to this idea of them trying to highlight their inheritance of the Persian tradition), and that typo. Presumably someone had come in later and changed this sentence, presumably also in good faith, but in a way that was detrimental, misspelling "inheritor" and chopping or moving sentences without realising that meant they no longer really made sense or hung together. As such, I was then tempted to just change this section back to that version.

However, I still don't fully get it. Again that "the need of Mansur" part is ungrammatical and doesn't connect properly, so I assumed it was meant to read something like "These two things are evident from the construction, which is modeled after Persian structures, and from the need of Mansur to place the capital in a place that was representative of Arab-Islamic identity, which he did by building the House of Wisdom, where ancient texts were translated from their original language, such as Greek, to Arabic", and the original author had just made the simple and common mistake of not writing totally clearly. However, the issue remains of the building of a library being presented as if it has to do with the city's location. Further, according to the House of Wisdom's Wikipedia page (again, I'm not an expert), that was also "modeled after the Sassanian Imperial Library", so maybe that too was meant by the original author to be presented as part of how Mansur tried to highlight their inheritance of the Persian tradition.

So that section very much confuses me. It seems there's some valuable info in there (it seems to be about why the Abbasid caliphate felt the need to portray themselves as inheriting both an Arab-Islamic and a Persian tradition, and about how they did this), but very poorly presented and organised (e.g., it wasn't clearly delineated what was their attempt to highlight their Arab-Islamic inheritance and what was their attempt to highlight their Persian inheritance), and unfortunately I don't have the knowledge necessary to sort that out.

So hopefully someone else can come in and fix these issues, because I think they're substantial problems (potentially effectively accuracy problems, certainly at least clarity problems), but that the two parts of this article I've highlighted are still quite close to accurately and clearly conveying interesting and important info.

Thanks, and sorry for the extreme long-windedness BreakfastJr (talk) 07:58, 10 July 2017 (UTC) I agree entirely and like Breakfast Jr I don't have any suitable sources to replace it. But nobody has changed anything since July last year. It may be that there is a bad translation from one or more languages to blame somewhere along the line.Anyway I m going to "be bold" and will try to turn it into something like English. Maybe the original author of this section can make any necessary adjustments to correct any factual mistakes I make. Maybe the Professor of Arabic History at Oxford University (or somewhere of suitable standing is a wikipedia editor and can help us. Spinney Hill (talk) 10:07, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Baghdad. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://islamicceramics.ashmol.ox.ac.uk/Abbasid/baghdad.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.aljawadain.org/AKHBAR/news.php?action=view&id=5
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.aljawadain.org/AKHBAR/news.php?action=view&id=20
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/june2005/a060105la2.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/mar2004/a031804d.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/sept2006/a091906dg2.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Iraq-Looking-To-Build-Giant-Observation-Wheel-In-Baghdad-To-Promote-Tourism/Article/200808415088474?lpos=World%20News_0&lid=ARTICLE_15088474_Iraq%20Looking%20To%20Build%20Giant%20Observation%20Wheel%20In%20Baghdad%20To%20Promote%20Tourism
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.beirut.gov.lb/MCMSTest/Menu-Pages/SisterCitiesEN.aspx?NRMODE=Published&NRORIGINALURL=%2Fwww.beirut.gov.lb%2FMCMSEN%2FTwinning%20the%20Cities%2F&NRNODEGUID=%7B18839037-0140-436E-A1AF-7F8F3693C3E6%7D&NRCACHEHINT=NoModifyGuest%23
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050402090804/http://fax.libs.uga.edu/DS49x2xW684B/ to http://fax.libs.uga.edu/DS49x2xW684B/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050906060015/http://fax.libs.uga.edu/DS49x2xW684B/1f/desert_ways_to_baghdad.pdf to http://fax.libs.uga.edu/DS49x2xW684B/1f/desert_ways_to_baghdad.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050525231213/http://fax.libs.uga.edu/ds49x2xm465d/ to http://fax.libs.uga.edu/DS49x2xM465D/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050906055955/http://fax.libs.uga.edu/DS49x2xM465D/1f/dweller_in_mesopotamia.pdf to http://fax.libs.uga.edu/DS49x2xM465D/1f/dweller_in_mesopotamia.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060921050720/http://www.tufts.edu/home/feature/?p=ashkouri to http://www.tufts.edu/home/feature/?p=ashkouri

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 18:19, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This figure was created in 1883, by one William Muir who has his own wiki. There its says: ′Sir William Muir, KCSI (27 April 1819 – 11 July 1905) was a Scottish Orientalist, scholar of Islam, and colonial administrator... Among 20th century scholars, W. M. Watt (1961) described Muir's Life as following "in detail the standard Muslim accounts, though not uncritically"′. However, modern research shows these early 'standard accounts' to be completely unreliable, including the map; all of the history of early islam was written centuries after the purported events [1]. Muir's map is his own, with distances measured in miles rather than early Arab distance units. Where is the earliest map created by the (early) Arabs themselves?? And if there is one, why didn't Muir use it?

Most of the 1 million inhabitants must have been living outside the 2 km wide Round City, which cannot have housed more than a few thousand people; how can you cram 1 million people and ′many parks, gardens, villas, and promenades′ (article) in a space with a diameter of 2 km?? So you need suburbs which are indeed depicted in Muir's map. But why would leave a million people exposed to potential enemies, with no (massive) wall to protect them? What is the point of huge walls ′... about 44 m thick at the base and about 12 m thick at the top... 30 m high...surrounded by another wall with a thickness of 50 m.′ (article) to protect just a few thousand people?

Things are even more complicated because modern archeology hasn't found a single trace [2] of the old Baghdad or its massive walls - no ′coins, weights, and other official usage′ as the article claims. During centuries, millions must have travelled to and from Baghdad: visitors, merchants, armies. They must have left countless artifacts in the soil around Baghdad - nothing has been found. Try searching with strings like Baghdad excavations.

To cut a long story short: the map is fake, just as the mythical Baghdad of the Abbasid caliphs.

[1] Hugh Kennedy, The Great Arab Conquests (2007)

pp. 2 - 22:

′We have almost no perfectly contemporary records or descriptions of the Muslim conquests. All the accounts passed down to us, have gone through several stages of editing and revision, and the addition of new and sometimes spurious information (...) The narratives of the early Muslim conquests are replete with confusion and improbability, and are often impossible to accept at face value (...) In the form in which they have come down to us, these accounts were editied in the ninth and early tenth centuries; that is between 150 and 250 years after the events (...) Furthermore, there are some examples in which later versions of the story seem to have access to more names than earlier ones do. This is deeply suspicious for modern historical sensibilities. The anecdotes seem to grow details as they are handed on from one generation to the next (...) Perhaps even more exasperating for the modern historian is the vagueness about chronology.′

[2] Hugh Kennedy, The Prophet and the Age of the Caliphates: The Islamic Near East from the 6th to the 11th Century (2004), p. 377. --Gerard1453 (talk) 19:25, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The list of references to the early history of Baghdad does not feature quality sources. To give some examples, in the article, section History/Foundation, it says ′They chose a site north of the Sassanid capital of Ctesiphon (and also just north of where ancient Babylon had once stood), and on 30 July 762[28] the caliph Al-Mansur commissioned the construction of the city.′. For further reading, one is referred to Corzine, Phyllis (2005), The Islamic Empire, Thomson Gale. pp. 68–69. But the only thing that I can find by way of biography, is that he is the author of books for ... young adults. He seems to be an amateur, lacking any suitable qualifications.

Another example is in the section Etymology, where for the term Middle Persion, one is referred to, among others, the article Baghdad in Islamic History, http://Islam.about.com, 15 July 2013, updated March 29, 2017, retrieved July 22, 2017. The author is one ′Huda′ who turns about to be a convert to islam, now living in the Middle East. She hasn't any qualifications whatsoever and cannot be expected to be objective.

I suggest, for literature and references, to stick to scholars, specializing in the relevant field, with a healthy respect for archeological field work, that is, making sure that their ideas are at least consistent with archeological results. --Gerard1453 (talk) 17:21, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Baghdad-1174177 1920.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:21, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

• BAGHDAD SKYLINE.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:51, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Even though chaotic, User:Ghalibrev made decent additions. I propose this edit to the Center of learning (8th to 13th centuries) section and if there's no disagreement, will edit the article in 72 hours. I'm not specialized in medieval Islamic history so assess the references at your own will. I'm going through all these efforts to make sure people can finally distinguish my edit and other vandalism.

Within a generation of its founding, Baghdad became a hub of learning and commerce. The city flourished into an unrivaled intellectual center of science, medicine, philosophy, and education, especially with the Abbasid Translation Movement began under the second caliph Al-Mansur and thrived under the the seventh caliph Al-Ma'mun.^[1] Baytul-Hikmah or the "House of Wisdom" was among the most well known academies,^[2] and had the largest selection of books in the world by the middle of the 9th century.^{[citation needed]} Notable scholars based in Baghdad during this time include translator Hunayn ibn Ishaq, mathematician al-Khwarizmi, and philosopher Al-Kindi.^[2] Although Arabic was used as the international language of science, the scholarship involved not only Arabs, but also Persians, Syriacs,^[3] Nestorians, Arab Christians,^[4][5] and people from other ethnic and religious groups native to the region.^{[6][7][8][9][10]} These are considered among the fundamental elements that contributed to the flourishing of scholarship in the Medieval Islamic world.^{[11][12][13][14]} Baghdad was also a significant center of Islamic religious learning, with Al-Jahiz contributing to the formation of Mu'tazili theology, as well as Al-Tabari culminating the scholarship on the Quranic exegesis.^[1] Baghdad was likely the largest city in the world from shortly after its foundation until the 930s, when it tied with Córdoba.^[15] Several estimates suggest that the city contained over a million inhabitants at its peak.^[16] Many of the One Thousand and One Nights tales, widely known as the Arabian Nights, are set in Baghdad during this period.

JahlilMA (talk) 10:08, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I originally proposed fixing the citations per WP:CITEHOW and integrating this content into the article body. It's suboptimal that the citations still include several books without page numbers, but I don't see anything obviously incorrect (aside from some minor issues like mixing up denominations with ethnicities and promoting the apparently disproved, though still widespread notion of the House of Wisdom was an academy rather than a library). It's undue in the lead, but it seems to fit well somewhere in the body of the article in this abridged version. The original, longer version could go into History of Baghdad. Eperoton (talk) 00:03, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your feedback. I’m aware it’s far from perfect (with cn part still exist) but hopefully I can find some time in the future to fix them up. JahlilMA (talk) 01:49, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It was originally pronounced Bardad (with a glottal R similar to the French R, and not like the Spanish R). To this day, that is the native pronunciation, with the Arabic Rain - which is an emphasized (glottal) Ain, and depicted in Biblical Hebrew as the letter Gimmel (equivalent to C) without an emphasis diacritical dot in it (which would turn it to the English sound of J similar to what happens with the letter G in English i.e. in the word Geography).

According to Rashi's commentary on the Talmud the city reffered to as Bagdat or Bagdetta is "The major city of Bagdad". It could mean in Aramaic (and similarly in Hebrew): On the shore - with the root GDa meaning shore or river-wall and Ba meaning at, or (in both languages) "You have committed treason" (with the verbal root BGD meaning to commit treason, with the vowels BAGAD meaning to have committed treason in the past, and the additional Ta meaning "By You").

See the Daf Yomi (in Hebrew) about Rashi and Bagdad vs. Bagdat.

Has anybody heard of this? Is this the "Jewish" way of calling that city, or is there any evidence that it was an early pronunciation of the name of the city? פשוט pashute ♫ (talk) 16:00, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Abu nawas.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:28, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are errors in the article on the subject of naming, as I have added all the old nomenclature based on archeology and approved scientific and academic sources by Dr. Taha Baqer. Dr. Taha Baqer discovered an entire archaeological city under Baghdad, the Kingdom of Eshnunna, in which the law of the Kingdom of Eshnunna was found, which is older than the famous Hammurabi law مصطفى محمد ٣٠٥ (talk) 00:44, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit, you've removed a number of reasonable looking reliable sources and replaced them with text attributed to a single source; additionally, the new text you've introduced is rife with grammatical and formatting mistakes. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:48, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop pointlessly copying the same text as replies to questions from 6 years ago. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:53, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"The roundness" The roundness of what? Can anybody assist? I don't have the sources cited and can't check this. Spinney Hill (talk) 08:44, 14 March 2022 (UTC) .[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Flag of Baghdad.svg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:21, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

• Al Shaab Stadium IRAQ.jpg
• Madina Stadium.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:02, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

• Baghdad City View.jpg
• Iraqi Clock in Baghdad.jpg
• Iraqi Street View.jpg
• The statue of freedom of religion in Baghdad.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:39, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reparations are needed in the shining part of the globe currently because they’re sixth god worshipping. 2600:1700:BB80:11D0:6D95:8BD8:71AD:FDF4 (talk) 16:07, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]