Talk:Ziaur Rahman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Featured article star 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. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 3, 2007.
Flag
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.
Featured article 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 was featured as the selected biography on Bangladesh Portal for the month of October 2007.
Collaborations: Sundarbans & Cox's Bazar
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.
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-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.)
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
MILHIST 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 lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions. Featured
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.
This article is supported by the Military work group.

Contents

[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?? —Preceding unsigned comment 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)

[edit] Disambiguation?

Special:Allpages/Ziaur_Rahman shows two other people by the name. Is there any reason why there's no disambiguation, or did just nobody ever do it? –Unint 00:29, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What's a D.J. College?

It says he enrolled in a D. J. College. What's that? --AW 18:18, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Maybe he can spin. --Bobak 21:50, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Haha. Seriously though, anyone? It says he went to one, but it's not explained --AW 15:49, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Zia"

Why is he called "Zia?" Doesn't he ever get confused with this guy? Brutannica 18:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Shortened version of his name. Similarly, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman is often referred to as "Sheikh Mujib" only. The concept of family name/surname is blurry in Bangladesh, as most families often do not maintain a family name.
Zia ul-Huq doesn't appear much in the Bangladeshi media/mindset, so the confusion isn't an issue. --Ragib 18:45, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Bengalis don't have much of a relationship with Pakistan anymore? Also, the two Zias were contemporaries. Brutannica 21:37, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, during the 80s, when Zia ul Huq was in power and alive, perhaps people in Bangladesh was familiar with the name. But that too just as the leader of Pakistan appearing sporadically in news media. --Ragib 21:42, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Images

  • Sources have been provided
  • Fair use rationale provided
  • Not a living person

I request PDH (talk · contribs) to discuss any removal of images here before going on a revert-spree. Thank you. --Ragib 02:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I conquer. The last few times you reverted a bit faster than me... but I also noticed that the removal of images doesn't follow the guide. MrMacMan Talk 02:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Four images showing what this man looks like, despite him being dead - is not fair. Especially since the actual copyright holder (a requirement for fair use) - is not known/specified. It's best to limit the use of fair use media in all situations. --Peta 02:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Can you show us where that is stated in the image guidelines? MrMacMan Talk 02:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Read WP:FUC - FUC 10 states that - The image or media description page must contain - Proper attribution of the source of the material, and attribution of the copyright holder (if it is different). None of these images have information on the copyright holder; they have just been lifted from a museum website. It's not good enough. I'd suggest that they also fail FUC 8 since they do not "contribute significantly to the article". --Peta 02:04, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

The photos are from www.bnpbd.com, the official website of Bangladesh Nationalist Party, (i.e. Zia's party), which asserts copyright. The attribution and sources for the images have been provided. That the images violate FUC 8 is entirely your personal opinion, which I don't agree with. --Ragib 02:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah as the image says the source provided is [1]. Which if you check the mainpage will be his party. MrMacMan Talk 02:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Vandalism

I just noticed in my referrer logs that my mirror of desertofthereal was used to vandalize this WP page. As a WP user and contributor, I apologize, and I'd like to make it clear that it wasn't my edit. (I'm not sure if it was the actual DOTR image that was displayed, or the one that gets RewriteRuled when things don't seem kosher, but still.) --76.212.172.181 06:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Financial corruption

This article does not address the fact Zia was fanatically opposed to financial corruption. He led by personal example and perhaps, died for this reason too. This is the core reason for his immense popularity even today. Visionary leaders like him don't come often in third world countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.71.89.41 (talk) 20:40, 20 October 2007 (UTC)