Talk:History of Bangladesh

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Bangladesh (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bangladesh, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bangladesh on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Note icon
The article falls into the work area of the History workgroup of WikiProject Bangladesh
WikiProject History (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Untitled[edit]

What is the "Mughul priesthood" mentioned in the article?

Independence declaration[edit]

Whether Major Ziaur Rahman's announcement was a declaration or announcement is a controversial issue. Seems like a POV to me; any ideas on this? Could be rephrased and made clear?

How about stating simply the facts, even excerpts from the declaration itself (It was in Bangla). That is, Major Zia declared the independence from Kalurghat Radio Transmitter at Chittagong on March 27th. The declaration was "This is Major Zia speaking... I, on Behalf of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman ......"
This is because there would always be a lot of controversy about this thing, so better stick to stating the facts only without going into any POV.
To be 100% factual, the faint Radio message attributed to Sheikh Mujibur Rahman (REference: Witness to Surrender by Major Siddique Salique who was a Pakistani Army PR officer, aide to Gen Niaji), can be mentioned too. However, most of the people heard only Zia's announcement (it was relayed by India's powerful transmitters), so Zia can definitely be acknowledged as the person who declared independence.
That sounds awesome. The current author quotes Banglapedia. I have checked some other sources too. Apparently, the radio broadcast was only picked up by a Chinese ship in Chittagong port, and the first major radio station to broadcast this was in Australia! BBC and Indian Radio then redistribute it. I am yet to meet a person who didn't get the declaration on 27th from BBC!


Someone recently removed the "on behalf of SM Rahman" part in the declaration of independence. The text of this declaration is at Bangladesh Liberation War article and seems to indicate that "on behalf of" part was present. Without getting involved in BNP-AL tug of war, isn't it justified to restore that article to the previous state since no reason has been presented for why the "on behalf.." part should be removed? -- urnonav 00:57, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Merger of East Pakistan into History of Bangladesh[edit]

Could someone explain why this is necessary? As I see it the two are different entitities and East Pakistan is not just historical. Information on its economics policy and administration should be included but those should not be in history of Bangladesh, but if anyone sees why the merger is necessary could you please explain before putting a tag up? Thanks. -- Urnonav 00:33, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I also don't see any reason for the merger. I think the tag put there is due to the extensive sorting/tagging activity in recent days. My opinion would be to remove the unncessary tag. --Ragib 02:09, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Ancient History[edit]

There is almost no reference to Ancient Bangladesh in this article. Perhaps another article should be created for that.

No, this article should be massively restructured, rewritten. --Ragib 21:07, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Well, this has certainly changed. But unfortunately, there's no such thing a "Ancient Bangladesh." That's like talking about "ancient Slovakia," or "ancient Namibia". This article has way too much material about ancient and medieval history, and not enough about the history of the modern state. Most pre-1947 material ought to be in History of Bengal. This article should give a brief overview of earlier history, focusing on a) the conversion of eastern Bengal to Islam; and b) the politics leading to East Bengal becoming part of Pakistan. It should focus on the history since 1947. john k 12:36, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Yes I completely agree with User:John K. History before 1947 belongs to Bengali people. Bengalis are in both sides of India and modern Bangladesh. So to be neutral medieval and ancient history should be in the history of Bengal. User Talk:Dewan357

Ist para confusion[edit]

"with Hadrath Shajalal Sha Sylhet, " -- I am failing to undestand this phrase in the first paragraph. --ppm

Improvement drive[edit]

Grameen Bank has been nominated to be improved by Wikipedia:This week's improvement drive. Vote for the article there if you are interested in this topic. --Fenice 13:22, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

POV[edit]

This article is full of POV statements. Has to be rewritten. --ppm 19:05, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

stop vandalism about Bangladesh[edit]

How come Garment workers strike is relavant in several thousand years history of bangladesh. plz stop this nonsense activities.

Relation with History of Bengal[edit]

Why should the ancient and medieval history not be merged with History of Bengal? deeptrivia (talk) 21:19, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Bangladesh as a country only emerged in 1971 but as a civilization it has an age-old history. That must be touched briefly in this article. Thanks Murad67 (talk) 06:00, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Article split[edit]

This article was getting very long, and heavily weighted toward post-independence history. I have summarized the post-independence material, and moved the detail to a new article, History of Bangladesh after independence so that this article will be more balanced. Ground Zero | t 21:00, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Oughtn't an article on the history of a country whose existence as a distinct region is a result of partition focus on its history since 1947? john k (talk) 00:03, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
johnk, Bangladesh considers itself as a successor to historical Bengal. The name Bangladesh means Country of Bengal.--111.221.0.2 (talk) 12:42, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:1971 surrender.jpg[edit]

The image File:1971 surrender.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:44, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Should be classified as outdated[edit]

This article, especially the intro, does not do justice to the rich history of Bangladesh. Nothing on the south west silk route, the ancient janapadas like at Wari Bateshwar and Mahasthangarh, the flourishing arts of classical and medieval Bengal, the prosperous industries and agricultural reforms of the Islamic era and the struggles against British colonial rule.--111.221.0.2 (talk) 12:25, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Relevance of Bengal renaissances[edit]

Hello all ! Somebody made reversal of my edit in this article labeling my work as Vandalism and that is unacceptable to me. The Bengal renaissances were mostly articulated and evolved in and around Calcutta and West Bengal and the people in and around Dhaka and East Bengal (predecessor of current day's Bangladesh)remained mostly aloof and non participatory in the process. If you study the history of Bengal renaissances, you would definitely get ample support to my position. Thus this section, while highly relevant to the History of Bengal, is somehow irrelevant to the History of Bangladesh. I Hope you now understand my position. However, he/she could have talked to me before reverting the edit as vandalism. I admit I am a newcomer to Wikipedia compared to a veteran like others but that does not mean my well thought assertion is a vandalism. RegardsMiniman77 (talk) 09:58, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Don't add too many less important picture[edit]

I have found with discomfort that some editors are adding too many insignificant pictures which are not very important for Bangladesh history timeline. Please only add pictures/maps which are doubtlessly significant and important to Bangladesh history. Thanks allAl-minar (talk) 05:15, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes ! This is the main page of Bangladesh history and only the significant and relevant pictures shall only be added here. A picture which is not very important to the overall history of the country must not be added here. Regards to all Murad67 (talk) 05:57, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
True. Too many pictures of less important issues will make the article messy looking. Only the pictures of prime importance should be added and kept here. Thanks ! Hossain Akhtar Chowdhury (talk) 10:56, 18 February 2014 (UTC)