Talk:Rohingya people

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Zuni girl; photograph by Edward S. Curtis, 1903 This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.
NB: Assessment ratings and other indicators given below are used by the Project in prioritizing and managing its workload.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's quality scale.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's importance scale.
After rating the article, please provide a short summary on the article's ratings summary page to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses.
WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:
Rohingya people is part of WikiProject Myanmar (Burma), a project to improve all Myanmar (Burma)-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Myanmar (Burma)-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Myanmar (Burma) To-do:

Contents

[edit] Copyright issues?

This looks like a simple copy and paste from somewhere else, so there may be copyright issues involved.--TheParanoidOne 05:35, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Copied and pasted from here, it seems. --TheParanoidOne 19:34, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality Issue

The position of the article is that Rohingyas are indigenous people of Rakhine (Arakan) state. However, it is a hotly debated issue. Most of the Burmese and the Arakanese people regard Rohingyas as the foreigners migrated from the areas of the present day Bangladesh during the 19th and early 20th century during the British colonial rule. Some of the British historical accounts also supported that fact. In my personal opinion, Rohingyas are in fact the migrated people, because they lack the hallmarks of the indigenous people, such as the old historical monuments, e.g. ancient mosques, etc. If they have resided in this area for hundreds of years, there should surely remain the archeological traces. For comparison, the indigenous Arakanese has a lot of historical monuments such as old temples. Again, although it can be inferred from that article that Rohingyas are the descendants of the Arab people, it is doubtful. Rohingyas in fact look like Bangladeshis, and may belong to the same ethnic group. We may need anthropological researches to confirm it. Although it may be true that a small group of Arabs settled in Arakan state hundreds of years ago, it is not very likely that their population now grows to millions. Also, the Rohingya culture (including their language) is more closely related to Bangladeshis than that of Arabs. However, I do not mean that the Rohingyas should be treated as the second-class citizens of Burma only because they are not indigenous. They should be granted their full citizenship rights as much as that of the Burmese and Arakanese people, because they are now residing in Burma for at least 3-4 generations. (The case may be comparable to that of the African-Americans and Asian-Americans in the USA.) Secondly, regarding the treatment of the present military regime on Rohingyas, although it is true that the junta has been maltreating and discriminating Rohingyas, they are not denied their outright citizenships. There are millions of Rohingyas holding Burmese citizenship certificates issued by the junta. (Z. Aung)

[edit] Rohingyas are the people of Arakan.

There are two main groups of people, the Buddhist Rakhine(formerly known as Moug) and The Muslim Rohingyas in Arakan State. Of course there are many historical monuments that prove that Muslims has been in Arakan since thousands years ago. One mosque in Mrauk U is still there which was built in 1600 and also there are archeological stone on which Arabic were written many hundreds years ago. Even the recent mosque built in Akyab was more than 200 hundreds years ago. Muslim Coins of Arakan are not lying the truth. When Burma invaded Arakan many Muslims were taken as slaves into the Central Burma particularly Mandalay City. There are still two mosques awarded by Burmese Kings and which were still in the center of the Burma's capital city Rangoon(Yangon). In 1942 more than 100,000 Rohingya people who were half the Muslim population of that time were massacred by Buddhist Rakhine by the help of Burmese government. Many had fled the Arakan to neighboring countries such as Pakistan(Currently Bangladesh) and India.

To tell the truth it was Rakhine Maug who migrated into Arakan in thousands in 1972 and onwards from Bangladesh hill track and there is no doubt that there are many Rakhines who have one home in Chittagong hill track and another home in Arakan. Come and tell me if this is not true.

Burma's brutal government always make big propaganda that the Muslims are the migrant people simply because Rohingyas are Muslims. Today Rohingyas are everywhere spread all over the world because of systematic persecutions of Muslims people to drive away from the counry. Today there are more than 1.5 millions Rohingya people out Arakan and became stateless people. Today Rohingyas people are urging international community to come in rescue of Rohingya people who are nearing to yellow level in endangered people list though Rohingyas inside the country are more than 2 millions. Imagine Refugees in 1978 amounted to quarter millions which are only one eight of the total Rohingyas in Arakan. If any body want to know about the atrocities towards the Rohingyas read the UN reports on Rohingyas.

Rakhine are enemies to Rohingyas as the Israelis are to Palestinian. Rakhine will never tell the truth towards the Rohingyas as Fire never tells the truth of the water.

Ahhh, sorry, I think I've dropped by at the wrong moment, but I agree. Racism, ignorance and mutual animosity can go a long way to influence a person's writings which is clearly the case presented in the above node by a certain person who deems the Rohingyas as immigrants from neigbouring Bangladesh. You say "they look like Bangladeshis" simply because some of them do not belong to the mongoloid sphere which predominates the country? How simple-minded. I'm talking to that guy who created that ignorant "Rohingyas are migrants" node, by the way. -Eric 15:41, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Copyvio

While a discussion of this ethnic group is a valid topic for an encyclopedia, please do not cut and paste information from other sources into Wikipedia. The old page has been deleted as a copyright violation, please feel free to start again, but use your own words. --nixie 04:25, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

The current content has been taken from Rohingyatimes article (The Land and the People section). The topic is important, considering the plight of the Rohingya people, so please start the article with your own words. --Ragib 23:26, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Restructuring

I restructured the article, because it was a huge mess. Also, most of the content seem to be taken off other websites, even the HTML tags were left behind. Anyway, I also removed some parts which were either bad english or irrelevant. Thanks . --Ragib 20:34, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Naming the "External links" section to "Rohingya Website directory" is not a standard practice. In an encyclopedia, you cannot really create a portal or link collection claiming it as a directory. Also since this is an encyclopedia and not a website or blog, having a detailed list of Yahoo groups is not really very encyclopedic material. So, I renamed the section back to "External links" and removed the Yahoo Groups part. --Ragib 04:10, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup

This article needs a serious amount of cleanup. I think it is contrary to wikipedia's policy to promote Yahoo groups, and also to mark sections claiming to be a directory of websites. Also, the copied content from www.freerohingyacampaign.org need to be verified as one with proper copyright permission under GFDL. I hope the contributors would stop promoting their website and put real, non-copyvio content on the plight of the Rohingya people. Right now, the article just promotes a website, and is definitely going for a VfD. Please work on cleaning up the article and make sure it remains non-copyvio. Thanks. --Ragib 21:44, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

NONE YOUR BUSINESS MR. MAGH.. Go back to Bengali wiki and do it whatever you like MR. MAGH

I also ask the current contributors who are extremely interested in changing the names of external links to "Website directory" ... please take a look at official Wikipedia guidelines Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles#Standard appendices. Thanks. --Ragib 21:47, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

GO and Change in Bengali Wiki Mr. MAGH

Please do not vandalize the talk page. Thanks. --Ragib 22:28, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I really disagree with Ragib blaming that contributors are trying to promote their websites. First of all Rohingyas are world most oppressed people and they are in danger of disappearing if not helped in time. And Rohingya population are very few maximum 3.5 to 4 millions. I think this is the very reason that the contributors are trying to show as many website links as possible in their articles to spread the messages of Rohingya problems all over the world and not promoting for personal advantages. I hope in this view Mr. Ragib will try to help Rohingyas who are struggling for their causes, the cause for their very existance and the cause for their very basic human rights. [RL]

I really don't see any point of contention between you and me, other than the use of copyrighted text, and a large number of links some of which seem quite unrelated and somewhat POV. The article at its current status is a copyvio, and such content is not allowed in wikipedia. The current contributors are not really helping the Rohingya cause by using copyrighted content, and reacting indecently to any proposal of cleaning up the article. Anyway, I am rewriting the article with proper structure and content, and would be delighted if others also contribute to it. Thanks. --Ragib 01:38, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
As a third party who happened across this discussion, I'd like to remind the contributors of the following:
If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly . . . do not submit it.
This appears in the edit window every time that one submits an edit to Wikipedia. (Wikipedia is, after all, a wiki.) It appears to me that the contributors are unwilling to abide by this, and any attempt to discuss the various edits are met with acrimony. (Also see here.) I believe the contributors would be better off posting their material elsewhere, where it can remain under their direct control. I also suggest that, if this were to continue, it should be officially submitted for some sort of third-party review or moderation. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 02:32, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Thanks, please see a proposed version I started writing at Rohingya/Temp. I now have the structure of the article there, and everyone is welcome to edit and comment on that. After changes I will fill out the sections gradually, with changes that are to be discussed here before hand. I just hope that would be ok with the original contributors, who are always welcome to contribute in a positive manner. --Ragib 02:46, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
It looks like a good outline, though previously I was quite unfamiliar with the subject (as I said, I had really only stumbled across this). I did make a minor edit regarding format. Thanks for your efforts! -- Gyrofrog (talk) 03:10, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] MR.MAGH

USING WORD LIKE "MAGH ""???? IS IT BAD??? MR. MAGH

Why did you delete the word "MAGH Link to Rakhine"?? Plz don't ask me again?? You can look at the history Mr. MAGH.. Don't try to terrorist this article.

Good Luck Mr. MAGH

Please do not vandalize the talk page. Thanks.

If you are referring to this diff, you can see I removed/reworded clearly-copyrighted content from other websites, even the html tags were present there. As for the link, it talked about a ethnic community but the article linked there was a administrative region. If you have better wikilinks, you can always put it there. And finally, be a little *decent* in your comments before calling names. Thanks --Ragib 23:16, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)


MAGH ARE ALWAYS MAGH , DOG ARE ALWAYS DOG.. Who asked you to remove Mr. MAGH?

[edit] Removing comments

It seems that some users are removing comments from the talk page. While the comments were definitely quite hostile, removing them make the other comments in reply to the removed comments, look out of context. So, for keeping the talk page consistent, the comments should not be blanked. Thanks. --Ragib 08:26, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Systematic Ethnic Cleansing of Rohingyas

It has been so much heart breaking to listen and hear the tragedic histories of Rohingyas who fled Burma even far before its independent. Not only they lost their mother land and the properties therein but also they lost their daughters, children and loved ones in the hand of non-Burmese strangers on the way to finding a peaceful place to live. Many families have spent uncountable hours walking in the darkness to find slip roads to other countries. Many have ended up their lives in jails of other countries. For some, it took many years to reach countries such as Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, UAE, and finally for many to Saudi Arabia. Many families have died in the desert land of Arabia while trying to cross on foot. One family said they were saved by a crowed of birds who guided them to a safer place while they all were about to die in the middle of the desert.

Why Rohingyas have been leaving their own mother land since then? It is because of systemetic removal of Rohingyas by the brutal milatary goverment simply because they are Muslims and live together forming a large number of Muslim-only villages in some major cities in the Northern part of Arakan. There are no such other cities in Burma having concentrated Muslims in one area.

1942 was one of the largest of its kind of ethnic cleansing where nearly a hundred thousands Rohingyas were massacred including babies, children and the elders. It is said rivers were red in color for months due to man killed in crowed in the banks of the rivers as they could not swim and cross the rivers. All the houses were burnt down and children were thrown up to be cutted into pieces as they fell. Imagine it was just a few years before Burma got its independent from British.

In 1960s Rohingyas suffered a number of atrocities that causes refugee influx to then Pakistan. Due to a strong warning from Pakistani Army, atrocities were stopped but shaped into another form. Issuing National Registration Card(NRC) were suspended for Muslims people but not for the sister ethnic Rakhine community. Military rulers have waited for more than 25 years to create enough Rohingya Muslim young generations to become without NRC cards. It was the 1978 when a well prepared Dragon Operation Team(DOT) was sent to target the Muslim community in Arakan to fully eradicate those young Muslims and children with the allegation that those who have no NRC cards were migrants people from Bangladesh. The DOT started pulling young girls and children from their fathers and mothers and sent into inhuman captivity jails where they were raped and treated so inhumanly that many families had died without food and fresh air. The bad-news spreaded so rapidly and calamity became so distress that people in large quantities started to fled leaving their live-stock in the field, the land un-harvested, the home with full of stock, the wealth without any care. More than 250,000 Rohingyas crossed the border to Bangladesh.

When most of the Rohingya refugees were returned to Burma by international agreement, atrocities changed to another new form. First, free movement to Rangoon(the capital city) and other states and divisions inside Burma, was heavily restricted thus blocking all major trading business for Rohingyas. Anybody, found in other states by imagration department, was depoted to his home place Arakan after giving a month or more jail punishment. Then it was slowly tighten so much so that Rohingyas can not even move from one village to another village without a paper signed by an authority department to move. Rohingya students who got admission for professinal education such as medical and engineering were totally banned to move to Rangoon to continue their education saying Rohingyas have no rights for movement as well as a higher education. Worst, heavy taxes were enforced to farm products such as rice even when farms were destroyed by natural calamity. Forced labour were enforced without even food allowance, Muslims land were confiscated in large for Buddhist village settlements, and also distress killing, raping and jail punishment without any apparent reasons have been seen in large scale. All these systemetic deliberate actions cause the Rohingyas unbearable situations without any justist which lead to leaving their own motherland every day.

Is it enough to eradicate all Rohingya Muslims?

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.138.64.173 (talk • contribs) 27 July 19:20 UTC.


Would you mind clearing up what you have in mind? See WP:NOT, talk pages are not blogs or discussion forums. Stick to the article, please. I don't see the objective of your huge monologue (interestingly added to by several anon IPs). If you want to include any information, add them *with appropriate references*, and don't make it sound like a blog. Thanks. --Ragib 01:27, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Mr. Ragib, I am writing the unchallengeable truth. Please do not try to attack in favour of hiding the truth. Let Rohingyas write their own undeniably true self experience and the true witness of intellectual Rohingya fathers, mothers and elders. I have not yet finished my article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.138.64.171 (talk • contribs).

Dear Anon, I failed to understand the meaning of writing such a monologue in the talk page. This is NOT a blog. There is nothing that prevents you from writing properly referenced information into the article ("unchallengeable truth" needs references too). But making up delusions about others "hiding the truth" doesn't help in anything. For the last 2/3 months, I've been seeing similar messages from your IP block and many from there have vandalized my user page and some other pages. I am quite disappointed in the attitude. If you are really acting in good faith, you should work on making the article better rather than vandalizing my page or writing monologue/blogs. Thanks. --Ragib 17:23, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
Dear Ragib, target an IP block but simply blaming one for others is the work of illitrate. Congratulation for your valuable contrubution to wekipedia but do not let others feel you are against the cause of Rohingyas but discuss if you are truthful. Thanks. [Arohang]
Dear Arohang,you are right! he seems that simply blaming and accused others without getting any prove, it is so funny that this guy is involving other's affair and wrote a lot of baseless. So,we arakan people must show clear vision. This kind of unwanted action is really poor and illitrate. Anyway, let us try to understand him.

Thanks, --Arakan 13:16, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the nice way of creating sockpuppets and talking to yourself. I really am yet to see any constructive edits from you. I came to the article to clean it up and organize it, without references to content. But without any valid reason or arguments, you are consistently vandalizing my user page and talk pages, and leaving curses and abusive language. You don't own an article in wikipedia. If you don't want your article to be edited, you should write your own blog. Wikipedia is a collaborative project, and it doesn't help trashing other users without a single bit of reason. I hope you'd return to senses and edit constructively to wikipedia. You are always welcome to contact me regarding anything. But please stop vandalism. --Ragib 15:30, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
Rajib, you are again accusing me and others. if you want to advice be nice way. but your message look so urgly . think twice writing before, be constructive way.you behaviour won't be accepted by anyone. so better do your project in your page and bengla wikipedia. i don't have enough time to contribute an article in wiki. may be soon.thanks,--Arakan 19:12, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
Nobody "owns" wikipedia. Articles are open to all to edit, not to vandalize. Anyone is free to go on and edit an article, as long as it is done in good faith. I have edited articles regarding south and south east asia, and would continue to do so, no matter whether you like it or not. I think you should take a look into Wikipedia's basic policies (Wikipedia:Five pillars. Also, take a look at Wikipedia policy on No Personal Attacks. For reasons I can't understand, you are consistently attacking anyone trying to clean up the disorganized status of this article. I have had my talk page and user page vandalized by severl IPs from the IP block I mentioned, also some one set up an account just to vandalize my pages (See Antirajib (talk • contribs)). Try to be more constructive please. Add, enhance and elevate articles. If you do your work in good faith, and follow the wikipedia's established conventions and etiquette, this article can become a lot better. Cursing others and vandalizing pages do not yield any good results. Thanks. --Ragib 19:19, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
I know nobody owns wiki but only you .. that's why that guys started anti on you. please don't mention here your personal affairs in this talk page See WP:NOT, please!

thanks.--Arakan 10:27, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "Attention"

I've just copy-edited the article; the "attention" template seemed to be unjustified — at the very least it's much too vague. I've removed it; if editors think that there are specific problems with the article, could they explain them here?

Ragib has been subjected to childish vandalism and attack because he tried to improve the article; if that continues, accounts will be blocked. I hope that that's clear. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:46, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

hey mel,

is that your attention to us ??? firstly you gotta ask --Ragib to stop unwanted actions. remember , every has their owns POV. please do not mention personal stuffs .study WP:NOT, --Eddiewiki 16:25, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

What I don't like is the creation of sockpuppets. User arakan or whatever, please don't go on creating new and newer sockpuppets to advance your reason-less campaign against me. I'd really like to know about my unwanted actions. So far, Arakan/Antirajib/Eddiewiki, all three (two of which are sockpuppets of the other) have failed to show any. Thanks --Ragib 17:15, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] blog

I don't see any problem in calling a blog, a blog. I wonder what's so offensive to Arakan (talk • contribs) ... --Ragib 15:00, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

yeah.. it 's no problem at all but you guys are trying mess other organisation name and make confusion to wiki visitor.you guys are continously attacked to an organization who's absoultely annocent. please look at their organization name and web domain name , it is not just the blog. so, stop the confusion on others. learn http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Guide_to_writing_better_articles#Standard_appendices i know very well what 's your attention. Please try avoid such things! Be Gentle as a contributor. thanks, --Arakan 15:24, 11 August 2005 (UTC)


Besides having trouble understanding what you say, I'm also totally in disagreement with your somewhat convoluted logic. And if you *know* very well what my intention is, please let me know so that I can form mine accordingly. On a serious note, the hostility to other editors is quite surprising. The article here is in GFDL, I or anyone else have as much right as you to edit and improve it. Time and again, I ask you to look into the history section, and show me *one* edit that I did without good faith and without improving the article. The article was a copyvio from your site to begin with, I organized it into sections, and put your numerous links (all capitalized, with misleading link names) to proper formatting. If you call such improvements as my "hostility", please look into other articles and see how wikipedia works. Such hostility against other editors will only ruin the credibility of your edits. Thanks. --Ragib 15:33, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Dear Ragib, I'm also absoultely disagree with you. you are again and again insult to other organization name and title. what's the problem with you ?? Is that only your job in wiki?? why you try to improve only on BLOG?? that's so funny that you guys are messing in wiki. I know that your contribution to wiki is really great . please don't try to spot on your name. Leave it , make it right as their orginal name . Thanks ,--Arakan 15:45, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Calling a blog a blog is an insult? Am I missing something. The website link you provide is a blog. It is *NOT* an organization web site. It *is* a blog. I am not calling the other links as a blog. The link you gave is a blog to any visitor's eyes. The original name is there, blog is added as to mark what it really is. I can show you many precedent in wikipedia where this has been done. If I earn a "spot" in my name trying to edit/improve articles, I'd love to have that "spot". Thanks. --Ragib 15:51, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
yeah .. that's absoultely trying to mess to other's name.. please read again what you wrote in your message. learn it more writing something before.. i think you are not deserve as PHD student.. am i right?i think educated people doesn't work like childish.i hope you got my point .

thanks --Arakan 16:01, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

you are right! the problem is created by --Ragib

please look at the history on article page. you would get every single information . --Eddiewiki 16:06, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Please stop talking to yourself. Your addition of coin images was the first step in improving the article, but creating a sockpuppet to manipulate talk pages is a backward step. Time and again, I ask you to show what exactly I did that offends you. Are you so mad because I removed the copyvio text? Are you so mad because I organized the article? You are free to rant on me, but at least give a reason for that. Finally, commenting on my activities outside wikipedia is not really decent. Please learn wikipedia etiquette before attempting to insult others. Thanks. --Ragib 17:24, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Ragib & mel, Please do not vandal the curent article since you both are admin in wiki , please keep wiki standard updated .violations would not be accepted by any reader of wikipedia . go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism.--Bobjack 08:58, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Arakan Coins

Dear All,

Coins Struck by the Kings of Arakan has been added in artcle page. cheers,--Arakan 16:46, 11 August 2005 (UTC)


[edit] 3RR violations

hello --Ragib --Mel Etitis Please do not revert articles more than 3 times per 24 hours. Also using sockpuppets to do that counts. Thanks. --Eddiewiki 17:39, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Interestingly, this is the comment I left at User talk:Eddiewiki. Should I leave comments in your pages from now on so you can repost them? You have reverted the article 6 times so far. Reverting simple vandalism is allowed, FYI. Thanks. --Ragib 17:43, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Hi Ragib, Regretfully , we know who you are now. Please improve the article and talk page not distroyed it .As a admin , you should be balance and fair . DO NOT bark all the time. Just comment!bye --Yonglee 07:23, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Recent disruptive edits and childish messages

Either one person using multiple accounts or more than one person with the same standard and style of English and making the same edits, has been disrupting this article, its Talk page, and the Talk pages of Ragib and myself. If this doesn't stop, some or all of the accounts will be blocked from editing.

If anyone has a genuine and specific complaint about the article, would they explain it here, clearly, simply, and factually, without emotional ranting and bluster? Only then can we start the process of collaboration. Simply reverting the article without explanation, especially when that involves no more than revrtign improvements in line with the Wikipedia:Manual of style, is not acceptable. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:51, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

mel, the explainations are more than enough for you,look at the messages above. so,you may not need to repeat again and again for blocking user.we knows you can do it as admin. beside, all the reader can be justify whether you are right or wrong.--Bobjack 10:32, 12 August 2005 (UTC)


Ok, I'm tired of this parade of sockpuppets. I am listing the following users, whose edits clearly indicate sockpuppets from the ip block 212.138.47.*

This is really not funny any more. Any more vandalism will be dealt with proper wikipedia procedure. Thanks. --Ragib 12:57, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] POV strategy

The best way to handly different points of view is described at [[Wikipedia:POV]. I personally suggest writing an article about the Free Rohingya Campaign (FRC), rather than fighting over the Rohingya article.

I have banned two of the accounts above as sockpuppets, but that's all I have time for today.

And all users, remember to Wikipedia:avoid personal remarks to one another. Just focus on improving the articles. Thanks. Uncle Ed 15:17, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

Dear Ed, Thanks for your info.--Arakan 17:07, 12 August 2005 (UTC)


Ed, since I have voluntarily agreed not to revert it more than once a day, would you handle the emergence of yet another sockpuppet, Rohingya (talk • contribs)? I'm really surprised at the tenacity, only if it were directed towards enhancing the article, this article could benefit a lot. Thanks. --Ragib 17:48, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Mel blocked it as a sockpuppet already. Wikibofh 17:57, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Language

Rohingya language is significantly similar to the Chittagonian dialect spoken in neighboring Chittagong region of Bangladesh. I'm not sure what part of this statement is so offending to the editor(s) from the familiar group of 212.138.47.* ips. Would you care to show some counter example/proof of Rohingya language having a distinct linguistic root? Because current evidence proves otherwise. Thanks. --Ragib 15:09, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Note: I have added the reference back, with citations. The language is very close to the Chittagonian dialect of Bengali language. If there is a question about that, please come up with references to the contrary. Thanks. --Ragib 20:17, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Dear Ragib,

Rohingya dialect may be close to Chittagonian dialect which is completely different from that of Bengali-Indian city Culcutta is the origin of Bengali population. Look the histrorical facts of old Arakan which was an independent country that begins from Feni (currently within southern Bangladesh) upto Gwah (the most southern city of current Arakan in Burma). When British gave independent to Burma and India (Bangladesh and Pakistan was not in existance at that time), they divided the Arakan into two, separated by Naf River which is currently border line of Burma and Bangladesh. So there is no doubt that Cittagonian and Rohingyas dialects have similarities. Old Arakan was inhabited mainly by three major groups: Cha-Rdi(Chañçi), Mough and Rohingyas. Northen part of Arakan was inhabited mostly by Cha-rdi, Central part by Rohingyas and Southern part by Mough. The Official language of old Arakan was Farsi and Islamic coins were used as the currency. So please do not relate Rohingya Language to Bengali Langauge. Rohang 19:28, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Political issues are hardly related to lingusitics here. Chittagonian is not "completely different" from Bengali. You must have been joking when you wrote Indian city Culcutta is the origin of Bengali population., right? Please read History of Bengal to get more information about the region. The comment on Independence of Burma is also factually incorrect. Chittagong and other nearby regions were already under Mughal rule (see Islam Khan in the 1600s-1700s. Finally, instead of hand-waving, please look into scholarly opinions about linguistics. Thanks. --Ragib 19:33, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] comment

I removed the sentences on "Bangladeshi refugees/migrants" going to Arakan. The situation is other way around. There are refugee camps in *Bangladesh*, where at least a million Rohingya refugees came in 1991 [1]. Thanks. --Ragib 18:14, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/o/h/Talk%7ERohingya_people_43e5.html"