Talk:Ziaur Rahman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Ziaur Rahman is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do.
	This article will appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 3, 2007.
Article Milestones Date Process Result August 9, 2006 Peer review Reviewed September 22, 2006 Featured article candidate Promoted Current Status: Featured article

	Bangladesh Portal Ziaur Rahman 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. Guidelines: Manual of Style - Naming conventions How you can help: Bangladesh Notice board - Discussion board
FA	This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
FA	This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information: Related task forces (nations and regions): Indian military history task force

Contents 1 POV 2 Bias 3 Need Adjustments 4 Still NPOV 5 Factual inaccuracies

[edit] POV

Some of the material in the article is just simply given as a matter of fact, when those facts are controvertial or not substantially proven. This includes whether Ziaur Rahman made an earlier declaration that he withdrew and re-broadcast with Mujibur Rahman's name in it. Jamaat's role in the War, while right, needs to be re-worded to make it sound less biased.

[edit] Bias

Can one simply call Tarek Zia a thief and Begum Zia a despot?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rohitde (talk • contribs).

Thanks for pointing out the pov commentry. Somehow these sentences eluded me. I have removed the unsubstantiated pov commentry. --Ragib 01:43, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Need Adjustments

It is is advised that the article be re written properly, take care of the grammer as well as edit the article the way wikipedia requires one to do.Remember this article should be as neutral as possible.--Awais141 11:10, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Still NPOV

I know Raqib in particular has put in a bit of work here, but perhaps its changed again - Rahman is showered with praise in places. Needs fixing. Hornplease 07:01, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

The article is becoming a quagmire ... at places it throws showers of praise on Zia, at other places it villifies him. It is desirable to have both sides in a bio, but the article makes broad statements without backing them up with citations. Unless someone provides them pretty soon, I'm going to remove all (both praise and and villification) uncited statements from the page. Thanks. --Ragib 21:57, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Factual inaccuracies

"Islamiyat" was introduced as a compulsory subject in all Bangladeshi schools from classes I to VIII.

This is simply NOT entire true, and also dubious in tone. Religious studies, not "Islamiyat" is mandatory. No non-muslim is supposed to be taking Islam is a topic. Rather, every school has Hinduism (Sanatan dharma) or Buddhism for Hindus and Buddhist respectively. I don't recall going through religious studies during the primary (1-5) school, though it was taught in 6-8 as a mandatory subject. Raman, the author of the reference from SAAG is plainly wrong in this context. I suggest removing this. Thanks. --Ragib 02:17, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Raman does mention that non-Muslims were permitted to take courses in their own religion. Maybe "Islamiyat" is the name of that policy in reference to Bangladeshi Muslims having to study religion - could you please verify this with some source? Rama's arrow 02:22, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Permitted to take an optional course - this gives the impression that the "Islamiyat" (=Islamic religious studies) is the mandatory subject, and people of other religion have the "option" to take other religious studies, but are usually supposed to study Islamic religious studies. That's not true. It is religious studies which is mandatory, not Islamic religious studies, and that too between classes 6-8. During the school finals, religion only was made mandatory in the 1990s, and again, it is "religion", not only "islamic studies". Please refer to This UNESCO document on that (Classes VI to VIII will be gradually incorporated under primary education. At these levels, the subjects to be studied will be Bangla, mathematics, general science, social studies (Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity)). Raman is clearly wrong or misinformed in this matter. --Ragib 02:40, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Two points - (a) the policy may have been modified after Zia's fall. (b) we can remove erroneous claims to "Islamiyat," saying that Zia introduced compulsory religious education. Rama's arrow 02:25, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

(b) Sounds fine and reasonable, please go ahead. About (a), I can't say for sure ... . Thanks --Ragib 03:28, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

What I do remember on this topic is that a school is allowed to not have teachers in religions other than Islam, and in such a case, students will simply take another topic (say accounting). Should be verified though--ppm 20:27, 20 September 2006 (UTC)