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.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard. If you are connected to one of the subjects of this article and need help, please see this page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Journalism 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.
Thanks for your comments - my apologies; I was basically trying to copy edit for basic sense, chronology, bio standard headers, and similar elements, coming to it from outside to work on readability for a general reader. Forgot to save frequently and ran into edit conflicts, which turned into a very long effort (and probably where some of the dropped links happened.) As a comment, sometimes it seems too many cites are given for some of the non-controversial facts. Just because five sources affirm something, even a quote from the bio subject, they do not need to be included. Will try to track down your corrections. Have already reduced the lead; I think discussing every charge he's made against someone else is not necessary in the Lead.
Parkwells, This is not what we agreed to. You were supposed to do a rewrite of the lead ONLY, and then allow Khazar2 to do another take on the lead. Why didn't you follow the agreed upon process, unorthodox as it was? My concern is that you're also introducing errors or removing information that is not tracked. Crtew (talk) 07:46, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Clearly, I misunderstood. How many times do you want me to apologize? I corrected the error on sedition (which others could have done when they saw it), and will leave the article to all of you to do with as you will. Maybe you might give me credit for also introducing some factual, cited content that adds to understanding what was going on.Parkwells (talk) 12:18, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Crtew, who agreed with you to re-write only the lead?--FreemesM(talk) 13:37, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
"2007/2008 elections" might better be called "Caretaker government". There was more happening than Rahman's midnight meeting or how it affected the timing of the election. The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia described Zia's tenure as characterized since 2003 by strikes, protests and violence. After her government resigned, the caretaker government (CTG) was backed by the military (which I added and cited in this section). The fall of 2006 after her resignation was also marked by protests and 40 deaths, which preceded Rahman's Nov. midnight meeting, which I previously added with cites. Also, the CTG in 2007 charged Khaleda Zia with murder and corruption, and jailed her for nearly a year - that was why the election was postponed for so long, not Rahman. I added this, as well as that the reassignment of 13 gov't officials from the Nov. 2006 meeting was done during the CTG. If editors want to keep the section more focused on Rahman, perhaps it should be called "Uttara conspiracy", as the Nov. event came to be called. It sort of begins and ends with that. But I think the other content has to stay in, as it is newsworthy and related to background of his event- the election wasn't postponed because of Rahman's meeting, and surely the jailing of his former boss in this period is worth noting.Parkwells (talk) 15:03, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
The strikes and violence occurs as early as 2004 in M.R's article here but they continue throughout until the election. The Aug 2004 deaths from a series of grenade in an attack on an Awami League gathering is a significant event during Rahman's tenure as BoI. He was afraid the continual strikes would decrease the amount of foreign investments. The Awami League early on wanted to force a CTG and advocated for fairer election conditions. (Note: Looking at it from today, it seems as if the same issues are in play but the roles of the coalitions are reversed.) Crtew (talk) 16:57, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Yes, that struck me, too.Parkwells (talk) 20:04, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
The military-backed caretaker gov't imposed a state of emergency in Jan. 2007, and during that year pursued corruption charges against Zia and two sons, as well as some of her ministers, AND against Hasina. At one point, relatives were trying to negotiate Zia's exile to Saudi Arabia, but she was arrested after that. Rahman's role was less than minor, given this larger context for postponement of elections, and significant charges against the leaders of the two major parties. How do editors want to handle this? I've added brief content and will be adding more RS from the Zia article, which includes sources from outside Bangladesh.Parkwells (talk) 15:40, 23 April 2013 (UTC)