Talk:Bangladesh/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 8

ER... BANGLADESHi??

shouldn't the [Demonym Bangladeshi] be changed to bengali? i actually think its incorrect and it makes me annoyed.. it should be bengali =D kk —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bd pride (talk • contribs) 00:25, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

All the reliable documents are saying it should be "Bangladeshi". We probably need to stick to it. But, if you have reliable sources that have a different opinion (i.e. "Bengali") and some others which document a Bengali-Bangladeshi debate, you may start putting it in. But, since this is a featured article, meaning its stability is important, you may put the rewritten part on this talk page first. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 07:34, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

The Demonym is quite correctly "Bangladeshi". This has been officially so since the mid 1970s. Also, Bengali is an ethnicity, while Bangladeshi is a nationality. Not all citizens of Bangladesh are Bengalis ... there are Biharis and also Tribal people such as Chakmas, Manipuris -- all of whom are Bangladeshis, but NOT Bengalis. --Ragib (talk) 11:16, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

The demonym "Bangladeshi" is correct. In fact the term "Bangladeshi" should refer to citizens of BD while "Bengali" should refer to people who speaks Bangla. However the the link Bangladeshi opens the article Bengali_people, which should be really confusing for non-Bangladeshis (or non-Bengalis?). Maybe a new article named Bangladeshi_people should be created. --User:Nafis_ru

I think Bangladeshi is correct. I agree with the logic told by Ragib & Nafis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Habib836 (talk • contribs) 07:37, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Parvez gsm (talk) 18:44, 5 October 2009 (UTC) How about we call ourselves as "Bangladeshian" instead of "Bangladeshi". "Bangladeshian" sounds more sophisticated then Bangladeshi. One french guy once called me as Bangladeshian ( he didnt know before how to call us). Once I told him its Bangladeshi, he replied, he thought of that word, but afraid i could be angry with hearing "Bangladeshi". Long version short.... why dont we call us "Bangladeshian". Honestly, it sounds much better.

Bangladeshi is right for bengals in Bangladesh,because there are more millions of bengals are in india(kolkatta) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xalan mustafa (talk • contribs) 12:57, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Climate Change and Bangladesh

I was thinking we should add a section concerning this topic, or at least incorporate in the "Geography and Climate" section. The main article "Geography of Bangladesh" doesn't really cover the issue of global warming and rising water levels, which seriously threaten Bangladesh as well as West Bengal. I am not well informed enough to start a section, what do you guys think? Have you seen an Al Gore's "Inconvenient Truth"? According to some reported climate trends, if things stay as they are going 60 million people in Bangladesh and West Bengal are at risk of displacement or death.--Taajikhan (talk) 20:35, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

The text states that "Most parts of Bangladesh are less than 12 metres (39 ft) above the sea level, and it is believed that about 50% of the land would be flooded if the sea level were to rise by a metre (3 ft)." and offer footnote 40. But foot note 40 is a badlink : http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00175563 Jfmxl (talk) 05:20, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Do you have any sources to share that has stuff on the issues? You would need reliable assumptions and stat figures, and similar stuff. Let's begin with a couple of weblinks, and then see where we go. Deal? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 08:07, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

subheadings

User:Moshino31 is interested in adding subheadings to the "Demographics" section (for showing religion, population, ethnic group, etc.). I am against putting subheadings in the "Demographics" section because of the following reasons:

• This is the main article on the country. Sections in this article are supposed to be summaries of the children articles
• Demographics is a short section with info on population and its characteristics. Dividing it into subsections is artificial and is against the summary style that needs to be followed in the sections.
• Unnecessary sections sub sections etc. add nothing but more clutter to the article.

• per Wikipedia:COUNTRIES#Sections guidelines, the country level articles are supposed to be formed of short paragraphs on various topics of the country

• there are several other country articles that are FA, let's look at them. India has a short demographics section, with no subheadings. Belgium, on the other hand, has a very large demographics section, which is justifiably divided into subsections. No such breakups in articles with short sections Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Chad, Indonesia, Hong Kong, Japan, Nauru,Peru, Turkey.

This article is a Featured article promoted after a lot of scrutiny and discussion. As shown above, majority of other country articles are not cluttered by adding unnecessary subheadings. --Ragib (talk) 12:15, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

About Banglapedia Reference

Official website of Banglapedia is banglapedia.org, banglapedia.net, and banglapedia.info. I guess to reference Banglapedia or put the name "Banglapedia" directly (other than mirror site) it will be better to use official site addresses. Rehmanf (talk) 07:25, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Banglapedia.info seems to be down. --Ragib (talk) 07:32, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

www.Banglapedia.info is up now. Rehmanf (talk) 10:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

MMM —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.68.88.192 (talk) 22:29, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Bold text —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.30.64.82 (talk) 11:15, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

is Bangladesh an arab country?

I would like to know it, I´m american —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.221.187.80 (talk) 03:29, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Please read the article, and you'll know the answer (hint: it isn't). I'm a Bangladeshi. :) --Ragib (talk) 03:54, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

IT is not. But 99 percent of the Muslims in the country, like in any other Muslim culture, learn to read the Quran, which is in Arabic. Also, thousands and thousands of Madrasa (traditional Islamic schools) students learn the language, as oppose to just learning to read the Quran. The Bengali language has hundreds of Arabic words in it which are legitimate Bengali words now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.68.245.84 (talk) 07:54, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

I dont see any reason why your'e getting so hyped up in replying to this guy. Just say Bangladesh is not an arab country. Any person with any idea of geography and world maps would know that. But dont exagerate the facts as well. You say Bangladeshis are 99% Muslim, thats not true, 89% of bangladeshis are proud Muslims and we have people of other faiths as well. Dont disregard them just like that :) --202.191.126.126 (talk) 20:26, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey retard, they didn't say 99 percent of Bangladeshis are Muslim. They said that 99 percent of the Muslims there learn to read the Quran. Sounds like you don't read (or recite) too well. Teetotaler 4 January, 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.67.81.197 (talk) 02:17, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Absolutely inappropriate to refer to an editor as a "retard" because he or she missed something. We have no time for that here.Mk5384 (talk) 18:47, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Bangladesh Amateur Radio League (BARL)

To promote amateur radio in Bangladesh, Bangladesh Amateur Radio League (BARL) was formed as a society on May 20, 1979. From the very beginning, the founder Saifud Dahar Shahid - S21A maintained close liaison with various government and international bodies to fulfill it's goal.

Though amateur radio was not unknown here, the activities were banned during the war between India and Pakistan in 1965. At that time Bangladesh was a part of Pakistan, known as East Pakistan. After the independence of Bangladesh in 1971, the ban was still in effect and no amateur radio activity was permitted.

Bangladesh Amateur Radio League (BARL) initiated a steady and persistent approach to enlighten and inform all the concerned the usefulness of amateur radio, particularly in the Government. In 1982 Bangladesh Amateur Radio League (BARL) was elected as the 115th member society of the International Amateur Radio Union - IARU. In April 1983, Bangladesh Amateur Radio League (BARL) was also elected as the 18th member of the Region 3 Association.

In spite of all sincere efforts, there was no further development on amateur radio operation in Bangladesh. However, things began to change when a new democratically elected Government came to power in early 1991. At almost the same time the country suffered another natural calamity when over 125,000 people were washed away in a devastating cyclone and tidal wave. The normal telecommunication links were cut off for several days. Bangladesh Amateur Radio League (BARL) immediately approached the authorities for withdrawing the ban and let BARL members to set up emergency communication infrastructures. This time, under practical conditions, the proposal got due consideration and was accepted by the Ministry of Telecommunications. It was sent to other relevant ministries.

Nevertheless, this incident created a positive outlook towards the amateur radio in bureaucratic circles. This eventually resulted in the formal approval of the amateur radio service in Bangladesh. ­At last the Government approved Amateur Radio Service in our country on 29 th August, 1991. Thus, a patient 12 year effort by the founders of Bangladesh Amateur Radio League (BARL) succeeded in establishing amateur radio in Bangladesh in the year of 1992.

To promote this hobby. You can find amateurs from Bangladesh DX-Ing almost everyday on Amateur bands, most frequently on 14320 MHz (20 m) and 7060 MHz (40 m) in SSB mode. They participate a Banglanet in the morning. They use a repeater for local communication on 2M band. Website is [www.barl.org] you are always welcome to visit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zicobaby (talk • contribs) 20:53, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Corruption

There seems to be 2 version of this story. One on the page for Fakhruddin Ahmed links to an article from Time Magazine which suggests that he is doing a good job. However on the main article here it suggests that the anti corruption campaign is politically motivated. --Abdulha (talk) 14:50, 1 September 2008 (UTC)Abdulha

Every aim needs a motivation and its the first rule of democracy to be political if that matters. Every aim needs a stimulation, goes through some phase but ultimately reaches what its been asking for. All that happened here in dhaka and in all the cities and towns in this country last year were never-the-less atrocities by major political parties motivated by political greed and above all hatred towards each others. Unfortunately that also is a part of democracy as well. Nasty but its a limb and no matter how far anyone is willing to keep it away unless there is any sort of understanding, commitment and compromise it doesnt work, democracy exits but little will it work if there are no code to follow, code of honor and trust. Our parties here only have grown all these years to have learn a social change of hating each others founder's, negetive campaigning on them and seeing it as their glory and one way ticket to victory. all these has nothing to do with parties although it is most seemingly true. its the people in this republic. A country stands on its people not on some parties. Yes it may be arguable that parties are people, by the people for the people but so as our democracy which stands over people who has long been ignored from the very basic needs like education which leads to now a country with more then half uneducated. and when it comes to choice, these poor desperate people has to choose a landlord or someone famous enough in terms of power or who have already bribed them. Little it gives any room to choose a public servent as honestly as s/he appears to be. And for those who are educated! Well lets say its choice a between better then the worse even where there it seems someone worth enough to be a servant. I wont say anti corruption campaign is not politically motivated, but even if it is.. what harm has it done or is it doing it at all. Think it this way, why there lies a law to withhold any one for a crime that has been perpetrated? Why do we use words such as offensive,illegal. Look india for example, it legalized alcohol, why? To attract investors, yes but the key point is the people have accepted it as a social drink in the first place. Which was a poison as their law claimed to their society has on its course changed over the haul because it became epidemic to their society. our society is epidemic over many issues which cannot be rooted out with a snap of word. When corruption runs in every vain of a society, the society itself becomes liable to it and the last possible resort remains as to legalize it somehow. In many countries its legal to take a incentive percent. I dont say we need that kind of system but to remove that sort liability this government had to act fast with the little time they have got. Even if it is politically motivated awarding certain parties some slack or taking a tougher role over another party, its for a good cause and above all with legal grounds and democratic way with very reasonable and rationale ideals. Its not a military cue, the government to implement such amendments or passing any ordinance has to be backed by a force to make it effective. Electoral reforms are backed by the mass majority in parliament thereby vested with the ultimate power of using any force there within a republic. So basically both elected or non-elected all are powered by the armed forces as their back ups. Everyone should see military as a catalyst to this process. They have so far helped us through many difficult times, acted more or less as public servant. The last thing that we can do is to honor them as defenders from foreign and inland enemies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.35.166 (talk) 17:02, 26 October 2008 (UTC) by..banglar-romeo.hi5.com;facebook.com/nirovtos —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.35.166 (talk) 17:10, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Replying to your statement, so you want Bangladesh to have its own version of Ataturk? Pleasing the west should not be the top of our agenda. It is the welfare of the nation and the preservation of our moral values that matters more and legalizing alcohol and opening nightclubs to attract investment is not exactly my idea of development. Bangladesh needs filtered modernisation, i.e modernisation that does not conflict with the ideals of our great leaders. InshaAllah Bangladesh will rise as a Muslim economic power which will promote the true form of development not only in the country but also as a beacon of inspiration beyond our borders. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.35.76 (talk) 10:49, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Err..The last paragraph on Corruption is completely POV. Maybe someone heard a story from someone or something. Pls rephrase it. It just gives a very different idea than wht is actually going on.

Religion

The section on religion shows percentages which add up to 100.0%. This implies that no one is without a religious preference or practice, which seems unlikely. Does everyone identify with a religion?

Further, the article says Bangladesh has "a commitment to the Islamic way of life through a series of constitutional amendments and government proclamations between 1977 and 1988." Is there only one Islamic way of life, and what does this entail? It would be helpful to explain how a way of life translates into a state religion in its other aspects, as in theology, society, economy, law, politics and government. Fconaway (talk) 00:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I'll answer your first question - according to the data from the Government Bureau of Statistics [1], yes, the number of people without religious preferences is quite negligible. From my practical experience, there are very very few people with no religious preferences. In fact, I am yet to meet more than 10 people who are 100% atheists. :) --Ragib (talk) 02:06, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Burma?

I believe the correct name for the country of Burma is recognized by some countries as Myanmar, I have added quantification of this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by El3mentary (talk • contribs) 12:53, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Which article had the mistake? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 13:07, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Cox's Bazaar market image

The image seems to be reversed. Is this a mistake or was it done on purpose? I suggest that it should be corrected. At least we'll be able to read the name on the fishing boat without a mirror.  :-)

Jonsecliff (talk) 19:23, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

The photo was taken by Jawed Karim (User:Jawed). You might ask him whether this photo was reversed, or the name of the vessel was actually reversed. :) --Ragib (talk) 20:09, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

That is indeed quite strange. I'm sure I didn't reverse the image, but it would be strange if the lettering on the vessel was printed reversed. Hmmm does anyone recognize the surrounding scene to be able to tell? :) Jawed (talk) 22:40, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

I looked at the image. The lettering is indeed mirror image. However, I then looked at the people. Several of them are holding/carrying items in their right hands. (For example, the boy carrying item on right hand, etc.). So, I think the image is correct, and the letters were actually printed in mirror image for some reason. --Ragib (talk) 18:53, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Is there a Bangladesh News Agency?

Does Bangladesh have a news agency? On the Pabna page there is a reference to someone who heads "BSS", but I can't find an article on it. Thanks. Itsmejudith (talk) 17:15, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, BSS is the official news agency. BSS stands for Bangladesh Sangbad Sangasthya, roughly translated as Bangladesh News Agency. --Ragib (talk) 18:44, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality questioned.

Article doesnt reflect the current status of governance properly. It is quite anti care-taker gov. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.34.2 (talk) 20:21, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

About School: Karnaphuli Public School And College is a most popular educational institution in Bangladesh. It's situated at CHITTAGONG City. It's established on 01/01/2004. it has three ecademic building. it has 700 student's,35 teachers. Principal is a highly educated person. The Executive Director is also a highly educated person and his playing as a director is very nice. From the begening of the institution the Executive Director working hard to gain a highest position in whole Bangladesh for this institution. A man can admit his son from Pre Nursery to Eleven Class. It has also a Hostel Compound for the far reaching student. Contact number of the school:00880 1917 706333.

This infomation created by: Minhaz Uddin Ahamed, OSP SECRETARY, SPACE GULF COMPANY LTD. Riyadh, K.S.A. phone:00966 1 4930959,Mob: 00966 56 8315825, 00966 54 7210749

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.149.84.97 (talk) 08:07, 16 April 2009 (UTC) 

Culture section removed?

Where is the Culture of Bangladesh section. In Bangladesh where culture is more than religion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.202.245.130 (talk) 06:17, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

East Pakistan

Hello

I am a little confused about the 'warning' at the top of this article that says not to be confused with East Pakistan. I feel that this needs some explanation, as clicking through to East Pakistan shows a map of a very simliar country in the same location with the same capital.

I read around out of curiosity and found that while the borders are different due to the way that the British Empire was broken up and the India / Pakistan war, this is pretty much the same country and the 'warning' is not entirely accurate.

I reference both Virtualbangladesh.com which has a great history section and the CIA world book.

Inglebygirl (talk) 19:47, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Emergency Law

The caretaker government were put on power by the army and foreigners. So there was not even the slight democracy in it,it was supposed to look after the policy of foreigners. The election of Dec 08 was not fair;BNP had done many bad things but they would still have won 35% majority. The fight against corruption was mainly an excuse to destroy the base of politicians, more charges were brought against normal politicians than the criminal ones. And then again,even the real cases were removed from the court against Awami League when it came to power in Jan 09. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.36.38 (talk) 06:20, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Health

I had entered a section on health, which was removed. What should be done now? Sarcelles (talk) 10:01, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

You could source the information. I looked at the revision and I didn't see any citations on there. It would help when you cite it to cite as much information as possible (title, author, publisher, etc.) since like Ragib said, this is a featured article and there are certain standards that need to be met. Potentially controversial statements (or statements that you think a user might use the {{fact}} tag) must be sourced. I think this goes in the lines of this. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 16:14, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

The article currently follows the format guidelines at WP:COUNTRIES. During the FA nomination process, it was a requirement for us to follow that guideline. This being the top level country article, it is not possible or recommended to cover every detail here ... this article is supposed to be a high-level summary of sub articles. I recommend that you add a sentence or two to the existing section on demographics, rather than starting a whole new section. Of course, like Elockid said, any sentence you add will need to be backed by citations from reliable sources. Thanks. --Ragib (talk) 20:13, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Contribution with file

I am interested in the relationship of nations to the world at large. I would like to contribute with this particular file, should it ever be needed. Thanks.

Who is the stupid made this image file with wrong spelling of Bangladesh? This file should be immediately deleted from wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.56.7.148 (talk) 14:51, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

File:Coat of arms of planet earth bangladesh.svg

Coat of arms of Planet Earth with the name of Bangladesh

why its says Bengali as a language worldwide? why not Bangla internationally???

Hate it when people ask me what you speak? i say them Bangla? they say what??? the next i say them is i am from Bangladesh, then they say Bengali,for this whole long conversation between me and him was letting him know whats my language,cant we internationally say it Bangla though we fought for our language movement and till now in worldwide it is celebrated as International Mother Language Day. where is the respect for the people who sacrificed there life for our language Bangla??? i request wikipedia to change our offiacial language into Bangla from Bengali and as whole worldwide it should be recognised as one and only word Bangla not Bengali. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xalan mustafa (talk • contribs) 13:18, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

The alphabets of English are limited and not able to pronounce many words of the world (like "TA" in Bangla) and there is a mean attitude among the English (as well as the Americans) to pronounce many words in other language deliberately wrong/odd way. This is how the English people started to pronounce the word "Bangla" as "Bengali" few hundred years ago and many illiterate or dumb Bangladeshi and Indians started to follow them blindly...as a result the word "Begali" got established in the world. I assume it will take some time to get rid of this wrong word from the world unless all the educated person of the world got aware of the mistake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.56.7.148 (talk) 14:48, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Bangali People are just plain old cool :D Its something that we cant deny ♥ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Afrida1220 (talk • contribs) 05:30, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Independence section of the infobox

I thought I'd talk this through on here before I change anything.

In the 'Independence' section of the infobox its states of independence from Pakistan. But shouldn't it also say something such as..

Independence

-From the United Kingdom..

-Partition of India..

-From Pakistan..

Please tell me what you think, thanks. Flosssock1 (talk) 21:30, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, technically, Bangladesh did not get its independence from United Kingdom. So, the current content ("from Pakistan") is correct. --Ragib (talk) 23:37, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Well no, but it was part of India, which did. Then India split up. I think these two things are as important to that section as Bangladesh's independence from Pakistan. Flosssock1 (talk) 17:26, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, then why stop there, why not also list the Pala empire as well :). Seriously, the infobox parameter is for the establishment of the political entity, not the historic lineage of the country. Also, please stop inserting non-existent parameters into the infobox. --Ragib (talk) 01:24, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Well what about just the partition of India? I think that is a pretty important part of its political establishment. Flosssock1 (talk) 13:08, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Etymology

Could someone say something about the origins of the word, like there is in the Vietnam article? I heard the last syllable "desh" is something we can also find in our word "paraDISE" and it means land. Is this true? Might be worthwhile to include. 84.129.160.120 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:26, 16 April 2009 (UTC).

Origin of the word 'Benga'

Like Indas or Lanka, Banga is Lithuanian word meaning 'a surf or a wave'. Indas is Lithuanian (Lithuanian and is old Sanskritian) word meaning 'a vessel or a dish', and Lanka in Lithuanian language means 'a meadow or a plain for catle' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.219.188.126 (talk) 18:27, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

bangladesh

hi you are the only website i trust can you please find out the climate i have a project —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.25.212.153 (talk) 16:49, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

cong —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.100.109.28 (talk) 04:46, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

reunion of Bengali

why this country is still divided? half in India and half as Bangladesh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.219.188.126 (talk) 18:32, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Time Zone Explanation

BST or BDT ? I use BDT for any kind of application.

Bauani (talk) 08:05, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

BST is the time zone, BDT is the currency. Arman ^(Talk) 08:20, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Then Whey infobox in Bangladesh Having BDT in Local Time ? Bauani (talk) 11:35, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/ says it is BST. BDT is often use for Bangladesh Time. BDST was used shortly for the summer time in 2009 (UCT+7). BST makes it confusing with British Summer Time (UTC+1) which also uses acronym BST. The thing is I never found an authentic info about it. --nafSadh নাফী ম. সাধ 16:44, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

The meaning of Bangladesh

In the context of the creation of Bangladesh and the meaning of "desh" to everyday individuals over the last several centuries - Bangladesh means "the landscape of those who speak Bangla", and not "land of Bengal". Desh (landscape) and language (Bangla) are integrally linked to the culture of Bengalis.

But it should also be noted that the Ganges delta, of which the state "Bangladesh" is made - is home to many desh (landscapes) and many languages - therefore the question remains - is the structure of statehood able to support pluralism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maitlandwilson (talk • contribs) 15:55, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

The word 'Bangladesh' means 'Land of Bengal'. All land where Bengali is spoken is not included in the sovereignty of Bangladesh government. nevertheless, there is a minor number of people living in Bangladesh whose first languages is not Bengali.--nafSadh নাফী ম. সাধ 16:49, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Neutrality on climate change?

This point of view, "increasing danger of hydrologic shocks brought on by ecological vulnerability to climate change" is not neutral.

Saying that Bangladesh is concerned about climate change would be neutral. Stating as fact that the country is in danger because of climate change certainly is not. 67.98.187.69 (talk) 17:22, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Semi Protected

This article seems to face a lot of vandalizing edits by anonymous unregistered (IP) users. I suppose a Edit semi-protected status should be imposed on this article. Is there an admin to do it soon (and avoid many unworthy but vandalizing edits)? --nafSadh নাফী ম. সাধ 03:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I was surprised to find no lock, and that was good for me. But it shouldn't be locked until some damage is noted, as in a vandalism gone unnoticed for a considerable period of time. Once that occurs though, there's no reason to wait for semi-protecting.204.93.160.84 (talk) 08:19, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Change in the intro

I made the following change to the introduction:

From: Political and linguistic discrimination as well as economic neglect led to popular agitations against West Pakistan, which led to the Bangladesh Liberation War in 1971 and the establishment of Bangladesh.

To: Due to political exclusion, ethnic and linguistic discrimination, and economic neglect by the politically-dominant West Pakistan, popular agitation grew against West Pakistan and led to the Bangladesh Liberation War in 1971 and the establishment of Bangladesh.

Please confirm for correctness and feel free to change with consensus.204.93.160.84 (talk) 08:17, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion on Military and Foreign Policy

Ideally, there should be two sections, one for Foreign Relations and one for Military. Please consider including this in a to-do list for this article. There is considerable information in the Foreign relations of Bangladesh article, and military should rightly be a separate section from foreign policy. I prefer the title Foreign Relations, as it's more inclusive.

But with the section that is there now, there is no picture to represent the foreign relations of Bangladesh. I'm not reasonably knowledgeable on the subject. But I was thinking about putting in the place of the MiG picture, a picture of Farakka Barrage, with the caption "The Farakka Barrage. The Farakka Barrage in India is a major source of tension between Bangladesh and India, due to iniquitous water sharing" I had no success with finding a properly licensed picture on the internet. But maybe someone here can find a suitable picture, possibly from personal shoots or news media.

Please help with separating the Military and Foreign Policy section into a Foreign Relations and Military section.204.93.160.84 (talk) 08:17, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Please Change

In this Article on History section there is a picture named Paharpur_03.JPG and in its caption there is a blind link named Paharpur, replace it with Somapura Mahavihara. These are same. Thamk you. 202.72.235.204 (talk) 14:40, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Somapura Mahavihara is less common name than the paharpur. Paharpur is the modern day name of the place and Somapura Mahavihara is the name what the institute was called in ancient days. --nafSadh নাফী ম. সাধ 16:56, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

But then again, Somapura Mahavihara is the name that UNESCO uses when it named it World Heritage Site or something. Ratibgreat (talk) 14:39, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

File name need not be changed, as many image file names in Wikipedia are not standardized yet. Current caption for the image is correctly explanatory. --নাফী ম. সাধ nafSadh^talk 19:46, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Indian inventions

A discussion is currently underway here to decide whether the title of the article List of Indian inventions and discoveries is accurate, and if its name should be changed to List of South Asian inventions and discoveries. All users interested in Bangladesh and South Asia-related topics are welcome to participate and express their thoughts. Mar4d (talk) 11:40, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Semi protected

As we suffer regular vandalizing edits from un-registered users, it is best to keep this page semi-protected for infinite period of time.--নাফী ম. সাধ nafSadh^talk 17:02, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

now semi-protected for one month. --নাফী ম. সাধ nafSadh^talk 04:38, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Not to be confused with !?!?!

is it necessary to put a note in the top saying,

Not to be confused with West Pakistan.

Enough dispute and changes have been made on this issue, but I do not see enough discussion on talk page about this matter. We may put a link in see also section instead. --নাফী ম. সাধ nafSadh^talk 20:00, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

this article really deserves praise

look at what it says about our language having a script "It is an Indo-Aryan language of Sanskrit origin with its own script." ... look at the flora and fauna part..more bird species than europe? hello! anyone?..cuisine ? .. Speechless.. A marvel I always look at to remind myself how erudite bangladeshies are...180.234.36.142 (talk) 15:51, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Bengali or Bangla

I notice that, Bengali is often written as Bangla in many Wikipedia articles including this. I have introduced a talk in Wikipedia talk:Notice board for Bangladesh-related topics#Bengali or Bangla. Please, read and discuss as necessary. Dispute be resolved. --নাফী ম. সাধ nafSadh^talk 09:14, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Copy Paste, rewrite and edit needed

the History section includes a paragraph, added by Thisthat2011, saying After Mujib declared independence ... sought shelter in India. this part seems like direct copy-paste from the cited page and not written in a style best for Wikipedia. A copy-edit might be of help for this section. Some other parts of this article need editing. --নাফী ম. সাধ nafSadh^talk 18:53, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

"Virtual" massacre?

"Yahyah’s brutal crackdown, including a virtual massacre of the intelligentsia in the universities of Bangladesh." What is a "virtual" massacre? It implies "not actually a massacre", which is presumably not the intended meaning. This needs to be clarified, preferably with statistics and a good source. (The current text is taken from a history article on a news website that seems rather sensationalist / POV - it claims for example that the crackdown "was so vicious as to put into shade even the war crimes of the Nazis" - a claim that has been toned down slightly for the wiki article). Wardog (talk) 10:32, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Bangladesh HDI 2007 still show 146th,

Bangladesh HDI 2007 still show 146th, and (Economy) section show -A prepared field for sowing paddy plants- Jpg, I thing we have more batter pitcher then that, we can put some ship building JPG,

or some Garment factory.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.58.216 (talk) 21:07, 7 May 2011 (UTC) 

Fahad 6/11> Hi Admin, I Want to add image of Garment Factory in this page. Pls confirm there will be no issue. Thx

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Bangladesh/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: H1nkles (talk) _{citius altius fortius} 23:16, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

I have decided to review this article. It appears to be a drive-by nomination. I am not keen on drive-by noms but I would like to give the nominator a chance to discuss before I fail the article. I have notified the nominator of my concerns and will give up to a week for a reply. If no discussion is forth coming I will quick fail. H1nkles (talk) _{citius altius fortius} 23:16, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Please begin reviewing. TGilmour (talk) 20:54, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

I need you to contact one of the primary editors on this page and ask them to participate in the GA review so that should I have questions regarding the content they will be able to answer. If you need to know who these editors are please note that here. H1nkles (talk) _{citius altius fortius} 21:59, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

I requested that the nominator contact one of the primary editors on this article before the review. To my knowledge no contact has been made and I feel that my review will not be adequately addressed by someone who has not made an edit on the article. At this point I will not continue with the review and I encourage the nominator to nominate articles that s/he has edited. Should there be any questions regarding this review please direct them to my talk page. H1nkles (talk) _{citius altius fortius} 22:47, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Map

Is it possible to include a map with 1) cities labeled and 2) international borders shown and 3) water shown? Jd2718 (talk) 03:40, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

few years of particularly chosen political history discussed in the introduction is totally not relevant

We do not read what happened in the United states during the american civil war in the introduction paragraph of the wiki article "United States of America". do we? no! We do not read Engaland was involved in a bitter and controversial war against Argentina few decaded ago. Talking about 2 years of emergency law in Bangladesh, which is well past now, is compltely irrelevant and is ut of topic. This i discussed withint politics and history section and should only be discussed there. Besides, Bangladesh, like many other countries, had many phases in its history where democracy was denied and elections were postponed by military government and dictators took over the reign of the country. However, th most recent election postponement situation was the least severe one in history and anyone knowing the truth while living in Bangladesh would know it was direly needed to ensure a free and fair election in a country of 150 million people. There was severe political unrest which was hampering the lives of general public and the caretaking govt installed by the leaving party was corruptedand as a result Military had to intervene to install a caretaking govt of honest and hghly acclaimed civilians to look over a fair election. The voter cards were one of the main sectors of corruptions previously and the army had to reprint them, after collecting the information from the field again. The political system was filled with corruption and most politicians had to be rounded up for the corruption charges. All these things needed time and it was not a dictatorship rule like it was in past cases. So it is not worth mentioning i the most important and general section of the article regarding Bangladesh. It could easily be described in the proper sections, which are Politics and/or History.

The exact lines I am talking about are: The government is a parliamentary democracy; however, political rule was suspended under emergency law for two years from 11 January 2007 to 17 December 2008, written in the end of the Introductory system. It is a parliamentary democratic system and there isa democratic govt in place and the above mentioned fact is irrelevant to the information presented before or after it. So I am proposing to delete this.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.254.172.154 (talk) 04:08, 26 September 2009‎ (UTC)

File:The Bangladesh players pose with the trophy after beating New Zealand 4-0..jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:The Bangladesh players pose with the trophy after beating New Zealand 4-0..jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 04:08, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

8th most populous?

According to the linked list of countries by population, Bangladesh is number 9, not 8 as this article claims, having some 700,000 fewer inhabitants than Russia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.140.13.60 (talk) 20:46, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Bangabandhu national stadium.jpeg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Bangabandhu national stadium.jpeg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Bangabandhu national stadium.jpeg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 08:38, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Bangladesh Air Force Mig-29.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Bangladesh Air Force Mig-29.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 1 May 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Bangladesh Air Force Mig-29.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:56, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Notable people section!

Having a dedicated Notable people section enlisting a few notable national in a country article is not a good idea, thus not advised in WP:WPC and not found in any featured or good country article (I am afraid I've not seen such entry in any other country whatsoever). Please note that, Bangladesh had formerly been a featured article but continuous non-improving edits have degraded its quality drastically. I am hence, removing this section until any good consensus strongly advises inclusion of such section. » nafSadh did say 04:12, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

refer to [this edit » nafSadh did say 04:29, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Religious statistics (reliable sources)

There's been some discussion (and revert warring) in the article and a few users' talk pages over the "best" statistics for religious membership. The current reference (As of August 2012) is an old Bangladeshi website, that appears to have been updated ~ 2005, and is at any rate, updated very infrequently. The religion breakdown looks like it was taken from the 2001 Census http://www.banbeis.gov.bd/bd_pro.htm User Talk:123.49.18.155 has tried to replace with data from the CIA Worldfactbook which MaterialScientist and others have reverted, as less reliable than the BD source. I think the PAGE being cited (at banbeis.gov.bd) may be unreliable or outdated, but am looking for a better source. I've found: http://www.bbs.gov.bd/WebTestApplication/userfiles/Image/SVRS/SVRS-10.pdf which has historical data (rounded) 2010 data (detailed). At any rate: these are the numbers I see (from various noted sources).

• Bangladesh Bureau of Education and Statistics (2001-2005?)

Muslim (89.7%), Hindu (9.2%), Buddhist (0.7%), Christian (0.3%), other (0.1%)

• CIA World Factbook (2004)

Muslim (89.5%), Hindu (9.6%), other (0.9%)

• Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics SRVS Report p39 (2010)

Muslim (89.5%), Non-Muslim (10.5%)

• Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics SRVS Report p176 (2010)

Muslim (89.37%), Hindu (9.59%), Buddhist (0.65%), Christian (0.26%), other (0.14%)

Can we get consensus?--Robert Keiden (talk) 19:02, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Also, it could be the CIA Factbook cribbed their numbers from this: http://www.bbs.gov.bd/webtestapplication/userfiles/image/SubjectMatterDataIndex/datasheet.xls, which doesn't make them less or more reliable, but does show provenance.--Robert Keiden (talk) 19:25, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 30 April 2013

3rd paragraph, 2nd sentence, "It is a member of the United Nations, the Commonwealth..." : Commonwealth should be Commonwealth of Nations. 108.206.152.174 (talk) 01:46, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Done RudolfRed (talk) 03:36, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

What is the problem with Toby323's edit?

It is true that English is widely used in Bangladesh, however, Bangla is the only language that has the official status within the country. It is more apt to have English under the section Other languages in the infobox.--Zayeem ^(talk) 08:05, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Readable English

I've (once again) removed a large section of mixed IPA and Bangla material from the first sentence of the text portion of this page because I feel that it does not reflect well on Bangladesh if the English wikipedia page about the country is not easy to read. The introductory section is particularly important because many readers never go any further than that. It should be short, written in nicely polished English, and should give only the information that an uninformed person would most want to know. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 03:30, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

There's strong opposition to that change with an edit summary "no discussion needed", so I'll try an RfC to see what other uninvolved editors think. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 12:05, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Article protected

This article has been protected from editing for three days to try to generate talk page discussion of the disputed content. Please follow the WP:BRD guideline. You may also wish to consider dispute resolution (WP:DR). Mark Arsten (talk) 14:55, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

RfC:Should the lead section be trimmed for readability?

Is this style of introductory section the best available model for a page about a country?

Survey

• It is a bit long, but not so much as to provoke an editing dispute, I hope. There are a few complexities that do need to be mentioned in the lead (the partition, then the split). My solution would to be to trim the info about the modern evolution of the country (it's surely dealt with in detail in the history section), and possibly a few other bits in the lead. Was an RfC necessary, rather than simply a thread? BTW, the humungously tall infobox is a pity. Makes for a visually dull opening. Tony (talk) 09:02, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! I've responded by working on the introductory text. The infobox is something that I have so little experience with that I'll leave that to someone else to deal with. Now to see if the changes have any sticking power on this edit-war-prone page. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 13:00, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

If I may butt in, regarding the humongously tall infobox, the government seal seems rather unnecessary. To Bangladeshis, any sign of the government only makes things worse!--203.112.78.5 (talk) 19:12, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

• Comment: Lede is not too long. WikiProject Countries describes here what should be the basic content of the lede. I think that current lede follows this description. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section defines the length of the lede here. Since this article has 56,529 characters it can be concluded that current length of the lede consisting of 4,5 paragraphs is not to long. I came here based on the invitation of RfC bot.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 08:01, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
• Comment-Indeed, for an article of this length, the lead is perfectly suitable. QatarStarsLeague (talk) 15:21, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
• Comment Lead section is fine. I'm not sure why this is an issue. Chris Troutman (talk) 02:31, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
• Comment The lead summarizes the article fairly enough and agrees to relevant Wikipedia guidelines and traditions. I can't find anything that's really wrong there. Of course, everything can be improved. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 08:49, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Etymology

The article needs a section on the historical evolution of the word Bangla, from ancient Bang to modern Bangladesh. The medieval predecessor of Bangla is Bangalah and this is missing in the article. The chronicles of great travellers like Marco Polo and Zheng He speak of the land of Bangalah and that definitely deserves to be noted in the article. In fact the anglicized name Bengal probably emerged from the old Portuguese name Bengala.--Bazaan (talk) 13:39, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 October 2013 Bakhtiar Khilji's nationality/ethnicity is incorrect

In the third paragraph of the 'Antiquity' sub-section, under the 'History' section of the wikipedia page of Bangladesh, 'Bakhtiar Khilji' is incorrectly identified as Turkish when in fact he was Turkic. I am referencing Bakhtiar Khilji's wikipedia page. Please make the correction. Thanks. 103.15.140.12 (talk) 00:28, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. --Stfg (talk) 13:01, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

State Religion

Dear user:MunnaHabibi, Bangladesh doesn't have any state religion at present. Its a secular country although the majority of the population are Muslims. Please watch Secularism in Bangladesh and also the declaration of the Supreme court. - Rahat | Message 06:34, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Dear User:Ctg4Rahat, please read your source more carefully. In paragraph 10 of the article, it states that:

• "the parliamentary committee recommended retention of Islam as the state religion"
• "the state would be neutral on the question of religion"
• "the Cabinet, chaired by Sheikh Hasina, approved a Constitution bill seeking the retention of "Islam as the state religion"."

In paragraph 16, it states that:

• "Islam, however, shall remain state religion as it was not covered by the judgment."

Additionally, you might want to read the Constitution of Bangladesh in which section 2A states that:

• "The state religion of the Republic is Islam, but the State shall ensure equal status and equal right in the practice of the Hindu, Buddhist, Christian and other religions."

The moral of the story is that you should always check your sources. Green Giant (talk) 19:39, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks...I see...Totally contradictory declaration by the court. A secular country with a state religion!!! - Rahat | Message 19:59, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Foreign relations and military

In the second paragraph in the section "Foreign relations and military", the sixth sentence reads as follows:

Recognising the importance of good relations, regional security and South Asian economic integration, the two countries have sought to revive relations in recent years, and have formed strategic partnerships to develop regional connectivity, infrastructure, greater trade, mutual access to markets, hydropower, energy, environmental protection and cultural projects.

I had just made a few small edits to this sentence to improve clarity, but there is still something not quite right, and that is the juxtaposition of "hydropower" and "energy". Hydropower is one way of generating energy. Should this read, "to develop........mutual access to markets, energy, including hydropower, environmental protection, and cultural projects", or shall we leave out hydropower and just keep "energy", or leave out "energy" and just keep "hydropower"? – CorinneSD (talk) 16:20, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Government seal in the Infobox

Why is it instrumental to have the Seal of Govt in the infobox? It wasn't here before and if it is not common in other similar articles, isn't it obnoxious to put them here now? --» nafSadh did say 05:59, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

edit request 6 dec 2013

5th paragraph, 3rd sentence, "...and a member of the Commonwealth..." : Commonwealth should be Commonwealth of Nations. The former, while it may be a common shortening of the latter, links to the wrong article. I originally fixed this 30 April but someone has reverted it in the meantime. 108.206.152.174 (talk) 23:50, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

 Done - Rahat | Message 03:39, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Just letting you guys know

This edit appears to be vandalism (if the user's other contributions are anything to go by). I cannot revert because the page is semi-protected. 166.137.248.125 (talk) 08:35, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

 Done - Vandalism reverted. - Rahat | Message 08:45, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Name in Bengali

The Bengali name must be there in both the infobox and the intro per the convention, see Germany for example. --Zayeem ^(talk) 13:38, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

This is really a petty issue. But here I think with the original Bengali and the transliteration both there with the long English, the place gets too crowded. And regarding your example of Germany, I think that with the pronunciation there, it gets the same length as it is here. There should be a solution to all this... English speakers may not want so many scripts, alphabets and pronunciations crowding the first sentence, when such reference things are there in the infobox. What do you say? I've tried this at Pakistan, too and there hasn't been objection. —ШαмıQ✍ @ 14:59, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

I guess we should go with the convention, more appropriately with the featured country articles i.e Germany. I would recommend to change it in the Pakistan article as well.--Zayeem ^(talk) 10:47, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Ok... I've got it back to what it was; there, too. —ШαмıQ✍ @ 06:29, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Human Rights and Minorities

Human Rights Of Minority religions like Hindu, Christians, Sikh etc. should also be included as a part of wiki impartiality and neutral point. Kindly provide complete picture of Bangladesh without fear. There should be no hiding of the truth. Dr Prashanna Jain Gotani (talk) 11:42, 26 December 2013 (UTC) References ;

1). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Notifications

2). http://www.amnesty.org/en/for-media/press-releases/bangladesh-wave-violent-attacks-against-hindu-minority-2013-03-06

3). https://www.google.co.in/search?q=wiki+bangladesh&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-gb&client=safari

4) http://interfaithstrength.blogspot.in/

5). http://hinduexistence.org/2013/12/11/islamic-violation-of-human-rights-and-attack-upon-minority-hindus-in-bangladesh-severely-opposed-in-hr-day/

6). http://www.hinduhumanrights.info/cgi-sys/suspendedpage.cgi

7) http://www.hafsite.org/resources/human_rights_report

8). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Hindus

9). http://interfaithstrength.blogspot.in/

10). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_American_Foundation

11). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism_in_Bangladesh

12). http://www.hrcbm.org/

Now I ask every genuine person to debate on this issue of truth!

Zia picture

This should not be a big issue, but the opposition to labelling Zia as a war hero is quite ill-informed and misplaced. Despite the fact that he was the country's first military dictator, Zia was also a decorated war figure, the proclaimer of the nation's independence and a leader of the Mukti Bahini. If you go through most history books on early Bangladesh, especially Anthony Mascarenhas's Legacy of Blood, it is clearly stated that, after the volatile period following the Mujib assassination, the rise of Zia as leader was welcomed by most Bangladeshis due to his role in the war. This is an important element in understanding the country's history and politics. Zia remains somewhat of a revered figure, with an image of a rather benevolent autocrat, and his party today stems whatever legitimacy it has from his role in the 1971 war.--Bazaan (talk) 20:07, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Bazaan, we can't label someone both positively or negatively even if it's supported by reliable sources per WP:W2W. But we can include something like Zia played an influential role during the Bangladesh Liberation War. --Zayeem ^(talk) 14:37, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Agree with Zaeem —ШαмıQ✍ @ 20:37, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

History - 20th century

In the third paragraph of the section "20th century" in the larger section "History", is the following sentence:

"The Bangladesh Forces, formed within 11 sectors and led by General M.A.G. Osmani, consisting of Bengali Regular forces, conducted a massive guerilla war against the Pakistan Forces with support from the Mukti Bahinis consisting of Kader Bahini and Hemayet Bahini."

I just added links to WP articles for "Kader Bahini" and "Hemayet Bahini" (after correcting the spelling of the former). However, I noticed in the article Mukti Bahini, that "Mukti Bahini" is defined as the Bangladesh Armed Forces, paramilitary groups, and civilian groups, together. The sentence that I quoted above makes it seem as if the Bangladesh Forces were not included in the term "Mukti Bahini". (Also, it is not completely clear what the difference is between "The Bangladesh Forces" and "Bengali Regular forces", and why both need to be mentioned in this sentence.) Shouldn't the definition of Mukti Bahini be consistent between the two articles? Any ideas or suggestions?CorinneSD (talk) 19:01, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Mukti Bahini was a resistance force against the Pakistan Forces during the Bangladesh Liberation War and comprised of the Bangladesh forces as well as the civillians, so Bangladesh forces were actually included in the term Mukti Bahini. Though since Bangladesh as a country was yet to be established during the war, they used the term Bengali Regular forces referring to the Bengali officers and soldiers who were earlier working in the Pakistan forces but joined the Mukti Bahini when the war broke out. I second you, there's no need to mention both "The Bangladesh Forces" and "Bengali Regular forces" in the same sentence and the definition of Mukti Bahini must be consistent between the two articles. --Zayeem ^(talk) 13:30, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I'm sorry it took me a while to get back to this. I am afraid it is all a bit confusing for me, in spite of the information you provided, and I hesitate to make changes to the sentence since I'm not sure what ought to be left out and what, if anything, ought to be added. Do you want to work on it?CorinneSD (talk) 17:24, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

CorinneSD, I just made this edit to fix it. Also, I just saw your earlier post regarding the Foreign relations and military section and made this edit. Hope they are okay with the prose. --Zayeem ^(talk) 14:29, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Both edits are fine. Upon reading the first one through, it seemed to me that the phrase "formed within 11 sectors" is a bit vague, especially for someone who knows little about the history or geography of Bangladesh. I'm wondering, (a) why it is important to mention this, and (b) if it is important, what, exactly, are those "sectors" and why the number (11) is significant. If you think the phrase is important to retain, perhaps you could add just a few words to make it clear what those sectors are and why it is important to mention the number of sectors.CorinneSD (talk) 18:17, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

CorinneSD, Bangladesh was geographically divided into 11 zones or sectors during the war as part of the warfare strategies of Mukti Bahini. I'm not sure if it deserves an inclusion. Also, it seems an editor has expressed his concerns regarding this sentence, I've left a note in his talk page seeking his suggestions.--Zayeem ^(talk) 18:47, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your note on my talk page, Zayeem. As I mentioned in the edit summary, my concern was with the express notation in the "sections" list that reads, "During Bangladesh War of Independence the Bangladesh Forces (not to be confused with Mukti Bahini) were divided in the geographical area of Bangladesh into eleven sectors." (my bold italics) If there is such a difference as to warrant that statement, then using "The Mukti Bahini..." in place of "The Bangladesh Forces..." (which is linked to Bangladesh Armed Forces) is rendered incorrect because it violates that sentence in the sectors list, doesn't it? Frankly, you may very well be far more expert on this subject than I, but it seems to me that if your previous change stands, then the sectors-list sentence must be altered to reflect what is on the Mukti Bahini page, as well. ("The Mukti Bahini (Bengali: মুক্তি বাহিনী meaning Liberation Army) is term which refers to all Bengali resistance forces which fought against the Pakistan Army during the Bangladesh Liberation War in 1971.") (again, my emphasis on "all") – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 19:06, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

I got you. I actually tried to fix the confusion expressed by CorinneSD through wrongly replacing the two terms, I guess I should have added a few more words to that sentence. If we go with the Banglapedia article on Mukti Bahini, it seems Bangladesh Forces were actually part of Mukti Bahini. However, the decision to form the 11 sectors came from Bangladesh forces prior to the formation of Mukti Bahini. I just made this edit to fix both the concerns, please take a look. If it's okay then we could include it in other related articles as well to keep it consistent?--Zayeem ^(talk) 21:15, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that sounds much better. I hope you don't mind that I tweaked it just a little. Just to keep it out in the open for discussion, I don't think that "Mukti Bahini" should be in italics. Am I unaware of any special reason that italics should be used? – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 15:21, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Perfectly alright! I was also a bit worried for the prose. And also no problem with the italics being taken off. I guess we should include it in the sectors list article as well? --Zayeem ^(talk) 15:41, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I think the "not to be confused with" could definitely be improved with clarification. Joys! – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 17:38, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Hyphenation

Bangladesh is one of the most buetiful countries in the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.16.23.176 (talk) 01:00, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

In English, words like these are not hyphenated, and this needs to be corrected in the article: northeast, southeast, southwest, northwest, northeastern, southeastern, southwestern, and northwestern.
See these: Southeast Asia; Northwest Territories in Canada; the former Northwest Territory in the United States; Northwestern University; Northeastern University; Southeast Missouri State University; the Southwestern United States; the Southeastern United States; the Murray–Darling basin of southeastern Australia; southeastern New Zealand.98.67.163.247 (talk) 08:35, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 January 2014

MunnaHabibi (talk) 10:07, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 January 2014

MunnaHabibi (talk) 10:08, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Map of Bangladesh

Has anyone noticed that the map of Bangladesh is quite useless? It may be useful to locate its general proximity in a broad brushstroke on a globe but as far as an actual map, it is as of now, quite useless. I will unfortunately because of the failure of Wikipedia have to use resources outside of Wikipedia to get a general idea of its whereabouts. Hopefully, someone can bring this article into the 20th Century (we'll worry about the 21st Century later) sometime soon... Isn't it a standard on Wikipedia to not only provide a contextual map but also a physical map for an article on a nation? Shouldn't it be a basic standard, if it is not already? Stevenmitchell (talk) 09:22, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Can you provide an example or two from Wikipedia articles? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 12:37, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

History - Middle age

Aren't things a bit out of chronological order toward the end of the second paragraph and in the third paragraph? Even ignoring the date of 1943, an example of famines, the date given for the beginning of British rule appears before the dates for the Maratha Empire in the third paragraph.

Also, what does the heading "Middle age" mean? I've never seen that in a history book. Perhaps "Middle period" would be better.CorinneSD (talk) 16:38, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

The chronological order is pretty dodgy at moment. Please, lend a hand. But, the middle age is a common enough phrase for history books. Take a look at this google book search (middle age: 2,130,000 results) as opposed to this google book search (middle period: 327,000 results). Also see that the middle age is a political historical term, while the middle period is more of a art history term (the term doesn't exist on the Wikipedia though). Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 12:44, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

If you follow that link to middle age, you get a disambiguation page where the historical links are to the middle ages. Shouldn't the heading be changed to that? Rothorpe (talk) 19:29, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

If you look at the titles in the first google book search link you provided, you will see that most of them refer to the period in a person's life called middle age. Only a few refer to a historical period. Either "Middle Ages" or "The middle period" would work. "The middle period" is not used only to describe the middle period in the work of an artist; it is also used to describe a middle period in history.CorinneSD (talk) 19:49, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

The debate on Middle Age/Period, I think is unnecessary. On historical context, the term "Middle Age" has been used on many numbers of occasions and had been recognized by other established encyclopedic sources (i.e. Enc. Britannica, British Library's Article on Medieval Realms). About, your quote "never seen that in a History book", I think that can be a little exaggeration. I am not a history student, but, with a great deal of interest, I have found many books containing the term, even some with the title containing "Middle ages". However, I must say, there are more books referring to the incidents/realms around this timescale as "Medieval". Your argument on the use of "age" in human health topics, is understandable. However, in Geological context also, there are significant difference between Period and Ages. Since history is closer to anthropology and geology, than it is to modern biological science, converting "Middle Ages" to "Middle Period" in this article would rather be more confusing for avid readers. Our readers and participants in this debate, may wish to consult Wikipedia articles Middle ages, Periodization#Notable_periods,Early_Middle_Ages,Late_Middle_Ages,High_Middle_Ages. However, considering your point on possible miss-lead, I would propose to converting "Middle Ages" to "Medieval time" or "Medieval History" on this article only. Mehedi (talk) 04:24, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate your opinion, but you have missed the point that, in English, "Middle Age" is not normally used to discuss history while the phrase "Middle Ages" is used to discuss history, usually European history. I recommend caution before using "Middle Ages" to label a period in Bangladesh history because the phrases "the Middle Ages" and "the Medieval Period" are used to refer to specific years in European (and sometimes Japanese) history. If the years being discussed in Bangladesh history do not correspond to those years (or are not already in use by historians of Bangladesh), then it would be misleading to use those phrases. I believe that, if a label is needed at all, "the Middle Period" is more appropriate than any of the other phrases. Also, it really does not matter what phrases are used in other fields. What matters is what is used to name periods in history in Standard English, that is, the English spoken and written by university-educated speakers of English, and by historians.CorinneSD (talk) 21:18, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, in English spoken and written by university-educated speakers of English, and by historians, the term Middle Age much more preferred to signify a time in history than the Middle Period. If you think Middle Period is preferred, please, provide a proof. Mehedi and I have provided enough of that. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 12:42, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Bangladesh and the delta

To Bazaan, regarding your recent edit: I only reverted your edit because you had deleted content with no explanation. Now, in the edit summary that accompanies your revert of my edit, I see your reasoning. I will leave it to others to judge the content, but I want to mention that I think the precise place you put the information on geography is not the best place. The sentence before it is about ethnic groups, and the information that follows it is about cultural matters. You now have a piece of information about geography interrupting a description of the culture of Bangladesh. You might look through the article (or section) to find a better place.CorinneSD (talk) 20:44, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I get your point. But to have it on the very first line is rather flawed, because to begin with, the whole country is not a delta. I understand your point on geography and I am restoring an old sentence on delta and the monsoon.--Bazaan (talk) 17:14, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I think the sentence about monsoon floods and cyclones is a good one, but I still think the organization of the paragraph needs improving.

The Bengalis form the country's predominant ethnic group, whereas the indigenous peoples in northern and southeastern districts form a significant and diverse ethnic minority. Bangladesh is dominated by the Ganges-Brahmaputra delta and is subject to annual monsoon floods and cyclones. The delta has a rich and diverse cultural heritage. The four largest religions in the country are Islam (89%), Hinduism (9%), Buddhism (1%) and Christianity (0.5%).

It goes from the country's ethnic groups to Bangladesh is dominated by a delta, then the delta has a rich...cultural heritage, and finally the whole country again.

Let me ask you, when you read this sentence, "The delta has a rich and diverse cultural heritage," doesn't that kind of indirectly say that the rest of the country does not? This sentence, and the sentence before it, belong in a section or paragraph devoted solely to the delta.

I really don't know how best to improve things. I just thought I'd point some things out. Then you can work on the organization.CorinneSD (talk) 19:25, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Actually, that whole paragraph needs to be rephrased. The very point of it is to shed light on the culture of Bangladesh- its landscape, traditions, pluralism and religions, as is common to so many other Asian country pages. Bangladesh of all countries, being so vibrant, needs its culture to be highlighted.--Bazaan (talk) 03:45, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

British Age

I just finished editing "British Age" to make it clearer and more concise, but the second paragraph still needs work. The second paragraph is:

"After the foundation of the British Indian Empire, Bengal was still under the heavy influence of British culture including architecture and art. The Indian Independence Movement was still underway in effort to overthrow the British Empire, and many Bengali people contributed to that effort. At the same time as the Islamic and Hindu conflicts occurred, Bengal would be split into two states."

This paragraph is not cohesive and lacks sufficient detail. The first sentence mentions culture but gives no details. The second and third sentences relate to the Indian Independence Movement but do not seem related to each other. I believe the third sentence needs to be a little more specific with regard to the time when Bengal was split into two states, and why this happened. If this is covered in detail elsewhere in the article, then I don't think this sentence needs to be here.

Overall, I think this section is rather short. Isn't there more that can be said regarding the "British Age"? CorinneSD (talk) 01:15, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Photos

It seems to me that the proportion of the photographs in this article needs adjusting. Some photos are quite large relative to both the text and other photos in the article, while a number of photos, I think particularly the ones of architectural masterpieces and landscapes, are quite small and deserve to be a bit larger. Also, in the Education section, the photo of the university has the following caption:

"East West University, one of the renowned private university in Bangladesh."

This is ungrammatical. It needs to be either

• "East West University, one of the renowned private universities in Bangladesh", or
• "East West University, a renowned private university in Bangladesh".

I think the second one sounds better but that someone who knows more about Bangladesh than I do should choose which is better.CorinneSD (talk) 00:32, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Willis Tower photo

The caption for the Willis Tower photo in the section "Post independence" contains the following statement:

"He has been called the "Einstein of structural engineering" and the greatest structural engineer of the 20th century for his innovative use of structural systems that remain fundamental to modern skyscraper construction."

Besides the consideration that it is awfully long, there are three claims in this caption for which citations ought to be provided:

• He has been called the "Einstein of structural engineering";
• [he has been called] the greatest structural engineer of the 20th century
• ...for his innovative use of the structural systems that remain fundamental to modern skyscraper construction".CorinneSD (talk) 21:13, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

This seems a lot of weight to be giving an architect who isn't mentioned in the article text - there's an equal-size picture of Muhammad Yunus above it, but he is described in the article as being a "significant contributor to the development of the economy". Regardless, a picture of an abstract wall sculpture hanging in a US office building doesn't seem - per WP:PERTINENCE - a great fit for an article about Bangladesh. --McGeddon (talk) 09:37, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree.CorinneSD (talk) 18:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

He was a great influential person. He also helped Bangladesh during the liberation war so he should be mentioned.--Aalaan (talk) 15:51, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Nobody is saying that he should not be mentioned or that he wasn't influential, just that he does not merit the largest picture and most praise-laden caption on the entire page for the whole country of Bangladesh, particularly when that picture is just a middle-distance shot of a sculpture in an American office lobby. Is there a section in the article that could include a sentence about him instead (and his role in the liberation war if it was significant)? --McGeddon (talk) 15:56, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Images

After seeing CorinneSD and McGeddon's posts above I checked thourhg the images on the article. They were in a bad shape. I tried to correct that. I have used free images only, and not those with a dispute over its free status. I also tried to keep the images as relevant as I could manage, though I intend to work some more in that regard. I also have used a lot of {{multiple image}} template, which may not be very friendly for print or pdf of the articles. Please, check and let me know. This also is a request to active members of WikiProject Bangladesh, though I understand that there's not a lot many of them available. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 04:50, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

It seems to me that the images and their size and arrangement are much improved.CorinneSD (talk) 00:49, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Some of the multi-images look a little wide, where you've got two landscape-format pictures next to each other, and it looks a bit non-standard to double everything up, but I can't see any manual of style guidance on this particular template. The article is definitely better than it was before, though.

Bengali people could use similar cleanup, having problems with large and/or floating images. --McGeddon (talk) 15:03, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 March 2014

"biggest exporting idustry" should be corrected to "biggest exporting industry" Dguzzo (talk) 17:42, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Done — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 18:05, 5 March 2014 (UTC)