Talk:Bangladesh/Archive 2

message: 1. A view of motijheel, for economics.
2. A view of a rice field, with farmers.
3. A view of a major river, maybe Padma.
4. A cultural scene, perhaps a dance performance.
5. A "gaye holud" scene, again for culture.
--ppm 21:10, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we do have number 3. As for number 4, I can sure dig up one. I'd like to add to the wish list another item: a view of some sports, possibly cricket. Thanks.--Ragib 22:26, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I dropped Shat gombuj in the article, somewhat out of frustration. It really doesn;t fit where it is now, perhaps a paragraph on art and architecture in culture can be added (culture in other good articles are long, so I have no problem with extending it). Also, Kerala continues to fascinate me, I  found out that there beautiful layout of pictures in due to using table constructs and such. --ppm 04:11, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wishlist for pictures 

message: I think I'm done with references, we now have enough. Peer review anyone?--ppm 04:14, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is very good - you guys could go for FAC with a good chance of success, but I guess it will be prudent to do some last minute nit-picking. Rama's Arrow 05:09, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Done with refs 

message: There seems to be a proliferation of recent anonym editors who want to do good, but with suspect outcomes. Dear 15.235.153.106, would you explain why you changed the placing of "e-kar" in the Bangla spelling of Bangladesh? It was correct and would render as it should in a properly configured browser. You are probably using opera or something else without indic script support enabled. --ppm 20:18, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  anonyms 

message: I believe most peer review issues have been handled. The only fuzzy area, imho, due to its subjectiveness, is the language in Culture and Subdivisions, which neverthless have changed in the mean time, hopefully for the better. Right now, I can't think of anything specific that remains to be done. --ppm 02:01, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hmm 

message: Given the precarious copyright status of the Surrender picture, I propose we use :Image:Shaheed minar Roehl.jpg instead. Thanks --ppm 17:37, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, either that, or the one from Jatiyo Smriti Soudho. --Ragib 17:44, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

text: The smriti shoudha pic is of lower quality, unfortunately.--ppm 20:14, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  First pic 

message: Looks like we are ready for a candidacy.--ppm 00:25, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to be sure, have we covered everything in the peer review? Nichalp had some suggestions, and so did others ... I'd like to check back again before FAC. Thanks. --Ragib 00:32, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I believe the main concerns were : Niazi pic, language of culture and subdivisons, merger of govt and politics, copyedit and possible deletion of education. I think all of these have been addressed, except Education, for which there wasn't a consensus, and probably should stay.--ppm 03:06, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Thanks, I rewrote the sentence to "defeated Australia in an upset victory". This should be ok and npov. Thanks for noticing this, and making the other corrections. --Ragib 04:49, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAC? 

message: "Literacy rates are 54% among men and 32% among women."  This needs a citation and also, I would suggest that you add something like (as per 2001 data) at end of the sentence.  This things change a lot (hopefully for the better) and so it is appropriate to give the reader a sense of how old the data is and also serving as a reminder to update the figures few years down the road.  --Blacksun 08:01, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the suggestion. I added a 2004 reference from UNICEF's statistics on Bangladesh. --Ragib 17:16, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Literacy figures

message: About this whole "mowdowk range" being the highest point etc, is there a reference. CIA, which we were making use to prevent change in area, still says keokaradong.--ppm 04:24, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: [Here is the reference as to why Keokradong is NOT the tallest point. Check out the Keokradong page and talk page too where one editor gave a lot of passionate talk on why the commonly cited CIA factbook info is not correct. --Ragib 06:16, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  highest point 

message: I think exactly one issue in peer review has not been handled, the immigration thing. IMO, we should have exactly 1 line in demographics mentioning human trafficking, illegal immigration issue with Myanmar and India (infact, the issue with Myanmar is more crucial from BD's pov). Something in the line of, "Human traficking has been a continual problem and Bangldesh has some illegal immigration related issues with Myanmar and India." (references).
Waiting for input.--ppm 18:54, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, and there are ample references in my knowledge on Rohingya refugees, but I don't have any references on migration to India. Perhaps you could ask User:Rama's Arrow, who raised the question, for a reference. Thanks. --Ragib 19:10, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Yeah I looked for them myself, but came up with nothing. --ppm 19:31, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see , , . I would like to emphasize that this is not a light issue, albeit for 1 sentence - its not entirely India's POV, as there are a lot of facts to support the claims. Please give it due respect. Rama's Arrow 13:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

text:  Dear Rama's Arrow, have you studied the Rohingya issue carefully enough to decide that the issue with India is more important (to Bangladesh)? If not, how can we escape the conclusion that there is POV going on here? Also, as I mentioned before, if it has not been important enough for mention in India so far, its hard to avoid the conclusion that this article is then a place for less important issues involving India. I think the attention given to it is enough.--ppm 15:41, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Hahahahhaha....the importance you give to the "Rohingya" issue is your own POV, and possibly the POV of Bangladeshi society - neither of which should be a factor on Wikipedia. As I previously said, the number of 'Bangladeshis (not Indians, as you wish you keep asking why Indians don't give it sufficient mention) illegally in India is speculated by sources in India and elsewhere to be close to 15 million. How do you make the conclusion that I ever claimed that the India issue was "more important" than Rohingya, when I didn't even mention the latter. Try to avoid "dear" and other forms of sarcasm in the future - I might not laugh the next time. Rama's Arrow 20:57, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Immigration and trafficking 

message: It's great that you have started the FAC, finally. Have you thought about adding some images in the space beside the list of "Notes" , a la Kerala?--Dwaipayanc 16:06, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, the photo of the farmer in the field is not well placed! The text has come within 2 images, which is rather bad. Please try to place it in a better position. I think, the coxbazar photo should be replaced with this one. You can place the Coxbazar photo beside the "notes", as I mentioned above. Bye.--Dwaipayanc 16:16, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, thanks. --Ragib 16:29, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Finally

message: The word "ill-governed" in "Economy" is probably not appropriate. First, the word itself is quite South Asia-ish—is it in regular usage in British English? Second, the placement of the word is potentially debatable, especially from the government side of view, as it is not a referenced word! I think it would be better to replace it! What do you think?--Dwaipayanc 17:16, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Minor point