Talk:Bangabhumi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a controversial topic that may be under dispute. Please read this page and discuss substantial changes here before making them. Make sure to supply full citations when adding information and consider tagging or removing uncited/unciteable information.

I suggest to delete this page, as it has no seperate entity and activity. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.22.194.43 (talk • contribs).

No, this movement is still powerful —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hikingdom (talk • contribs).

Someone claims the movement is still powerfull. Is there any activities of this movement at Indian/Bangladeshi newspaper. I think this is simply a fantasy page. No valid reference is made regarding this so called movement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.144.12.233 (talk) 10:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

No independent media reports in the last 5 years seem to support even the existence of this claim. In fact, last time I read about the movement in Bangladeshi media was in late 1980s. I'd like to see real claims backed by citations, rather than "he claims"-type of assertions. Thanks. --Ragib 07:08, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Hope this helps. i m not sure how to put citations in wikipedia. i have used ieee format. in addition, there is something called censoring in the media...this movement is not that powerful in bangladesh but getting some momentum among the refugees in India, especially in Assam. The refugees are being kicked out of their lands by the Indian government due to the new Citizenship Law. In addition, the elite community in Assam are also helping the government officials. Therefore, there are some groups, who are claiming to give some lands to these reguees. Since the refugees are neither allowed in Bangladesh nor India, we might as well create a new country constituting some lands from bangladesh and some from India. In this way, everyone is happy.Hikingdom

Ok, I don't see how the given reference qualifies the statement "There are also claims that the suffering of Hindus were neglected by president Ziaur Rahman". To qualify this, a reference is needed that shows Zia neglected the sufferings of Hindus. The given reference has only 1 sentence on Zia, which states "By this the process of killing secularism and promotion of hard-line Islamic values began. This was done by the then President Ziaur Rahman". This hardly qualifies the sentence in the article. Thanks. --Ragib 05:14, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I am gonna repeat myself here. As soon as u r unsecularizing the constitution, u r favouring one religion over others. Therefore, u r neglecting the minorities. in addition, most of the craps against the hindus were committed by jamatis, who follow hard-line Islamic values. Zia brought them into power and neglected the Hindus. These are common sense materials. Hikingdom 05:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, your common sense eludes me. The citation can qualify statements like the unsecularization of the constitution from the 1972 one alienated Hindus", but that does not really qualify "neglected the sufferings of Hindus". You can't mislead with a citation, and expect readers to deduce things. So, please rephrase the sentence, or find a citation that properly qualifies the sentence. Thanks. --Ragib 05:29, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for rephrasing the sentence, and adding a concrete reference. Having verifiable things is one of the foundations of wikipedia. Thanks. --Ragib 05:44, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] npov

This article is POV. It is stuffed with arguments which are sometimes not even related to the subject of the article.

For example, it quotes a whole paragraph from an author without any clear relation to the section or the subject of the page. Also, it is not really clear what the Pakistan Army section has to do with the ideological arguments.

The group and the so called movement existed, definitely, in the mid 70s up to late 1980s. But since then, there has been no significant activities of the group, other than a few news conferences.

Wikipedia should not be used for propaganda (the Ideological arguments section sounds like one), nor a mouthpiece for an organization or movement with almost no activity, or material existence. I have looked into recent news items, and fail to see whether the movement exists at all.

So, I've tagged it with NPOV. Please fix the "arguments" section. Thanks. --Ragib 21:03, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Interestingly, this article is supposed to be about a separatist movement, but cites no sources. True, there are several citations, but those are not sources/references to the subject of this article. Thus, it also falls under original research. --Ragib 21:09, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

As above, I have removed the out-of-context sections in order to make the article coherent. --Ragib 18:36, 12 July 2006 (UTC)