Talk:History of Bangladesh

message: Hi! I've been very occasionally making changes to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_Bangladesh
It's tough because I know nothing about the subject and have no background at all. I don't even live there. However the article is a complete mess and seems pretty important so any help in fixing it up, improving it, maybe making it more NPOV if appropriate, would be much appreciated. 84.92.85.50 (talk) 10:04, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Request For Help

message: Whether Major Ziaur Rahman's announcement was a declaration or announcement is a controversial issue. Seems like a POV to me; any ideas on this? Could be rephrased and made clear?
:How about stating simply the facts, even excerpts from the declaration itself (It was in Bangla). That is, Major Zia declared the independence from Kalurghat Radio Transmitter at Chittagong on March 27th. The declaration was "This is Major Zia speaking... I, on Behalf of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman ......"
:This is because there would always be a lot of controversy about this thing, so better stick to stating the facts only without going into any POV.
:To be 100% factual, the faint Radio message attributed to Sheikh Mujibur Rahman (REference: Witness to Surrender by Major Siddique Salique who was a Pakistani Army PR officer, aide to Gen Niaji), can be mentioned too. However, most of the people heard only Zia's announcement (it was relayed by India's powerful transmitters), so Zia can definitely be acknowledged as the person who declared independence.
::That sounds awesome. The current author quotes Banglapedia. I have checked some other sources too. Apparently, the radio broadcast was only picked up by a Chinese ship in Chittagong port, and the first major radio station to broadcast this was in Australia! BBC and Indian Radio then redistribute it. I am yet to meet a person who didn't get the declaration on 27th from BBC!
::: Someone recently removed the "on behalf of SM Rahman" part in the declaration of independence. The text of this declaration is at Bangladesh Liberation War article and seems to indicate that "on behalf of" part was present. Without getting involved in BNP-AL tug of war, isn't it justified to restore that article to the previous state since no reason has been presented for why the "on behalf.." part should be removed? -- urnonav 00:57, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Independence declaration 

message: Could someone explain why this is necessary? As I see it the two are different entitities and East Pakistan is not just historical. Information on its economics policy and administration should be included but those should not be in history of Bangladesh, but if anyone sees why the merger is necessary could you please explain before putting a tag up? Thanks. -- Urnonav 00:33, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I also don't see any reason for the merger. I think the tag put there is due to the extensive sorting/tagging activity in recent days. My opinion would be to remove the unncessary tag. --Ragib 02:09, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger of [[East Pakistan]] into [[History of Bangladesh]] 

message: Grameen Bank has been nominated to be improved by Wikipedia:This week's improvement drive. Vote for the article there if you are interested in this topic. --Fenice 13:22, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvement drive

message: This article is full of POV statements. Has to be rewritten. --ppm 19:05, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: Why should the ancient and medieval history not be merged with History of Bengal? deeptrivia (talk) 21:19, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Bangladesh as a country only emerged in 1971 but as a civilization it has an age-old history. That must be touched briefly in this article. Thanks Murad67 (talk) 06:00, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relation with History of Bengal 

message: This article was getting very long, and heavily weighted toward post-independence history. I have summarized the post-independence material, and moved the detail to a new article, History of Bangladesh after independence so that this article will be more balanced. Ground Zero | t 21:00, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oughtn't an article on the history of a country whose existence as a distinct region is a result of partition focus on its history since 1947? john k (talk) 00:03, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: johnk, Bangladesh considers itself as a successor to historical Bengal. The name Bangladesh means Country of Bengal.--111.221.0.2 (talk) 12:42, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Article split

message: The image :File:1971 surrender.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
The following images also have this problem:
*:      File:Mujib7March.jpg
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:44, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with File:1971 surrender.jpg

message: This article, especially the intro, does not do justice to the rich history of Bangladesh. Nothing on the south west silk route, the ancient janapadas like at Wari Bateshwar and Mahasthangarh,  the flourishing arts of classical and medieval Bengal, the prosperous industries and agricultural reforms of the Islamic era and the struggles against British colonial rule.--111.221.0.2 (talk) 12:25, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should be classified as outdated 

message: Hello all ! Somebody made reversal of my edit in this article labeling my work as Vandalism and that is unacceptable to me. The Bengal renaissances were mostly articulated and evolved in and around Calcutta and West Bengal and the people in and around Dhaka and East Bengal (predecessor of current day's Bangladesh)remained mostly aloof and non participatory in the process. If you study the history of Bengal renaissances, you would definitely get ample support to my position. Thus this section, while highly relevant to the History of Bengal, is somehow irrelevant to the History of Bangladesh. I Hope you now understand my position. However, he/she could have talked to me before reverting the edit as vandalism. I admit I am a newcomer to Wikipedia compared to a veteran like others but that does not mean my well thought assertion is a vandalism. RegardsMiniman77 (talk) 09:58, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Relevance of Bengal renaissances

message: I have found with discomfort that some editors are adding too many insignificant pictures which are not very important for Bangladesh history timeline. Please only add pictures/maps which are doubtlessly significant and important to Bangladesh history. Thanks allAl-minar (talk) 05:15, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes ! This is the main page of Bangladesh history and only the significant and relevant pictures shall only be added here. A picture which is not very important to the overall history of the country must not be added here. Regards to all Murad67 (talk) 05:57, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  True. Too many pictures of less important issues will make the article messy looking. Only the pictures of prime importance should be added and kept here. Thanks ! Hossain Akhtar Chowdhury (talk) 10:56, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Don't add too many less important picture

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on History of Bangladesh. 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/20140101140624/http://a.harappa.com/sites/g/files/g65461/f/CulturesSocietiesIndusTrad.pdf to http://a.harappa.com/sites/g/files/g65461/f/CulturesSocietiesIndusTrad.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://projects.cie.org.uk/banglao/textbook/historyandculture/premughal/muslimrule
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/spedition/23march2007/index.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_19-1-2005_pg7_28
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thedailystar.net/op-ed/genesis-bangladeshs-constitution-1209718
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.economist.com/node/8560006
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:51, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I will be changing the dating system on this article away from the biased, Christian based AD/BC to the common era system.  This will bring the article into alignment with secular usage such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_India.  If you object, please state why you are ok with the biased system here. Eupnevma (talk) 19:33, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Before you go changing AC BC please read Wikipedia:Manual of Style, specifically MOS:VAR. Also, instead of hundreds of discussions regarding the changes on hundreds of different talk pages, get a conversation going here: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Thanks! Masterhatch (talk) 20:33, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change dating system to Common Era 

message: ￼Feni 43.246.202.246 (talk) 10:44, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  history of divison