Talk:East Pakistan
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Bengal, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Bengal. Please participate by editing the article East Pakistan, or visit the project page for more details on the projects.
|
 |
East Pakistan is part of WikiProject Bangladesh, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Bangladesh and Bangladesh-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. Please do not subsitute this template.
|
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. |
| Top | This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject History of Bangladesh. |
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Pakistan which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Pakistan and Pakistan-related topics. For guidelines see WikiProject Pakistan and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. |
}
Occupying army? how can the pakistani army be occupying east pakistan when it is legally part of pakistan? Shouldn't it be that india invaded pakistan and made a new country
Contents |
[edit] Merger Issue
Why should this be merged with History of Bangladesh? Southern Ireland, Irish Free State, Éire are not merged into History of the Republic of Ireland. --Henrygb 01:09, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- I agree Secondly this can also be a part of History of Pakistan. Third in future if get gets further addition like population, geography, capital, goverment 'history of bangladash' article will get too length and then we will be in need of creating this article again.
- Zain 20:44, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Suggestions
I'll suggest, if we keep in mind, expected future expansion of both articles 'history of bangladash' and 'East Pakistan' (expansion is must if we see the pace at which wikipedia is growing), we should give 'East Pakistan' Heading in 'History of Bangladash' and refer this article as main article for viewing more detail. Additional benifit will be if some body is looking for the term 'East Pakistan' in wikipedia he will quickly see the result.
- Zain 20:44, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Problem with section
Read the section "Independence of Bangladesh", the first paragraph seems to say the same as the first few lines of the second paragraph.... 86.130.233.183 11:33, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Merger with East Bengal (province)
The section on history between 1905-12 can and should be removed from here, as the region had nothing to do with Pakistan at that time. I disagree with the proposal that this article needs to be merged with content from East Bengal (province), as the status quo is correctly reflecting history now. Thanks. --Ragib 21:26, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Rather than having two discussions at the two Talk pages, could it all take place at Talk:East Bengal (province)? It just makes things a bit easier. I've copied the above comment over. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:49, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] POV-section
I've put a {{POV-section}} marker on the "After independence from British Rule" section. Specific points which I feel need addressing:
- frequent exploitation of the majority Bengalis - please provide some examples
- infuriated sensible people - not a neutral phrase; it is not for an encyclopedia to judge whether or not people are sensible
- one of the bloodiest genocides of recent times - needs numbers (even if only estimates) and checkable sources; "it's common knowledge" isn't good enough for an encyclopedia.
- innocent Bengali civilians - again, not a neutral phrase, unless their innocence is shown by checkable sources.
Important: please note that I'm not disputing the facts of the matter, merely the way in which they are presented. Loganberry (Talk) 01:31, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing these things out, I've added the references, and edited comments to remove POV in the areas you mentioned. Having done that, I've removed the POV tag. Thanks. --Ragib 02:33, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
-
- Okay, that seems to have addressed all my concerns, and I have no argument with the removal of the POV tag. Thanks for responding so quickly. Loganberry (Talk) 11:12, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Merger
I would keep this as a separate article, but remove sections which pre/post-date East Pakistan. I think it was "East Pakistan" for a significant time, and deserves its own article, as with the various divisions of Ireland (see above), or the Soviet Union having a separate article to the Russian Empire. --MacRusgail 15:52, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Refrences for: East Pakistan's export earnings had been 70% of national total, while it only received 25% of the earnings.
Do you people have some actual refrences or articles to back the statement below? "East Pakistan's export earnings had been 70% of national total, while it only received 25% of the earnings."
What made east pak so special that it generated 70% of the national total ? considering the cituation today this seems totally absurd. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Digitalsurgeon (talk • contribs).
According to the CIA factbook (first thing that pops up when you google 'bangladesh exports', Bangladesh has exports of US$7.5B, compared to US$15B for Pakistan, so that would make 33% of the combined total. That doesn't fit the figure given in the article, but it's not impossible that (west) Pakistan's exports have grown faster since 1971. So not substantiated, but not absurd either. 67.180.32.251 05:56, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
It shouldn't be in the article unless it can be verified. john k 16:19, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
- See
- Pakistan, Planning Commission, An Outline of the Fourth Five Year Plan, 1970-75, p. 26
- Anthony Hyman, Pakistan: Towards a Modern Muslim State?, Research Institute for the Study of Conflict and Terrorism, 1990, p. 4.
- The first source shows that the development expenditure between 1960-65 were (69% in West Pakistan vs 31% in East Pakistan). Between 1965-70, the expediture was split 64%/36%. Other sources state that the data between 1947-1960 is skewed toward West Pakistan further. As for The question placed by anon 67.180.*, you can't compare the GDP's of last year to extrapolate the GDP's between 1947-1970. And as I have replied to Digitalsurgeon earlier, in the 1950s, the price of Jute skyrocketed, especially during the Korean War. That accounts for why the Eastern wing earned so much more than the western wing. Thanks. --Ragib 16:36, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Transport Links etc
I'm interested in how the two parts of Pakistan (East and West) were governed when their enemy India was in between them. Were there air links etc? Could someone write a section on this if they know anything about it? Thanks.--Wikipediatastic 13:30, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
