Talk:Chowdhury Mueen-Uddin

This article has been written by people intent on smearing this individual. In a matter-of-fact, citing poorly researched and biased newspaper sources, the wiki article states that the person has been found guilty and tried of war crimes. He has only been accused in certain newspapers, and in others, they were made to apologise because the person felt it was not true. If this article was the least bit neutral, it would be written in a more neutral way, mention his other work, as a previous version did, and suggest that he has been accused, and also mention that he has denied these accusations. Previous attempts to netralise this article has been vandalised by what clearly seems to be a lobby group in favour of the current government. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tristartelm (talk • contribs) 14:20, 13 June 2010

This article is neutral

This article states what the leading newspapers from home and abroad says and clearly is not intended to vilify anyone. And also, this article is not biased by government or any of opposition parties. Enough references, authentic references have been provided to support the contents of this article. I request to go through the references, specially reference no. 5, 6 and 7 which refer 'The New York Times' report published in 1972, just after the liberation war of Bangladesh. Now, tell me, is 'The New York Times' poorly researched and biased newspaper? 'The New York Times' had any problem with Mr. Mueen-Uddin in 1972 so that this newspaper published a report against Mr. Mueen-Uddin? Think about it. If the answer is a 'NO' (which is obvious), then please don't doubt about neutrality of this article. Please go through reference no. 11 which says that Prof Farida Banu, sister of martyred intellectual Giasuddin, filed a case against Mr. Mueen-Uddin with Ramna Police Station on September 24, 1997. So, Mr. Mueen-Uddin has not been accused by anyone as you stated is not true. If you do not believe in the report of this top and the most read and neutral newspaper, then you can go to Ramna Thana and check whether the case was filed or not to clear your confusion. If you have any confusion about the reputation of The Daily Star, please go through it's website. The newspapers (Bangladeshi) I have mentioned are: New Age (Bangladesh) and The Daily Star which are well known and reputed newspapers in Bangladesh. I request to go through the websites of these newspapers. Again, the newspapers from abroad I have mentioned are: The New York Times and Guardian and Front Page Magazine. I request to read about the newspapers to be sure about reputation and neutrality of these newspapers.

I again claim that this article is neutral because I have mentioned (in section 'Controversies')that a newspaper(Guardian) had withdrawn the complaints against Mr. Mueen-Uddin and provided the reference too. I included his current association and activities also (in career section) and provided a link to his company's website. If I were not neutral in writing this article I could have not mentioned these facts.

Think carefully, only one newspaper (guardian) 'withdrawn' complaint against Mr. Mueenuddin (and I have mentioned it) and this incident (complaint and withdrwal) occured in 2009, long after the liberation war. On the other hand, other newspapers namely 'The Daily Star', 'New Age', 'The New York Times', 'Front Page Magazine' reported about the activities (which are against the liberation of Bangladesh) of Mr. MueenUddin. Again, look, the report on 'The New York Times' was published just after the Liberation war(1971) which is important. I have gathered all the information from all these Newspapers. I did not skipped or exaggerated anything which you can check by going through the references. This proves the neutrality of this article.

I request to go through the online archive (Ref. no 1) to check if the archive is authentic or not.

Previous version of this article which completely removed all the information I provided did not included any reference except the link to the website of Multi-Faith Group for Healthcare Chaplaincy (Ref. no 2 in current article) in which Mr. Mueen-Uddin is the Vice-Chairman and did not mention any of the references (reports from 'The Daily Star', 'New Age', 'The New York Times', 'Front Page Magazine') which are very much available on net. Thats why, I should say that, the previous version which contained only the biodata of Mr. Mueen-Uddin was totally biased and completely not neutral.

A law court has already been formed in Bangladesh for the trial of war criminals. According to law minister, a notice will be issued, as per law, to the alleged war criminals like Mr. Mueen-Uddin to come to Bangladesh and face the trial. If they don't come Government of Bangladesh will negotiate with the Governments of other country to bring them back. (See Ref. No. 10). So, the claim that Mr.Mueen-Uddin is not convicted is not true. This article is not intended to defame anyone. This article organizes relavant information published in leading newspapers in Bangladesh from 1972 to 2010.

Again, I claim the neutrality of this article because this article contains information reported in leading newspapers in home and abroad. No imaginary or false or baseless information exists in this article. This article is not intended to vilify any individual. This article is intended only to record and make everyone known about the incidents; related, relevant information about the Liberation War of Bangladesh. And each line of this article is authentic supported by the reports in leading newspapers in home and abroad. Thanks. NasrinatWiki (talk) 19:35, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

I am going to remove the message from this article. Appropriate references have been provided to resolve the dispute.NasrinatWiki (talk) 06:09, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

I've removed the POV tag. The article now contains appropriate references. NasrinatWiki (talk) 11:54, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Full Protected

Having closed the AFD as keep I see that the BLP vios have crept in with ancient sources and no effort to balance the allegation with the result of the tribunal and withdrawal of the grauniad article. I have therefore removed and full protected to allow time to reach a consensus on what should be put up. If this happens before 2 weeks let me know and I'll unprotect. Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:08, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

• As I said during the AfD I think having a short bit on the allegations and the withdrawn Guardian article is appropriate. Given how short the current article is I'd say only a sentence or two. Hobit (talk) 10:05, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

I dont think being ancient of a source fails to keep its credibility. If you think the ancient source (The New York Times) and withdrawal of allegation of the Guardian Newspaper together makes the content of this article balanced then I request to remove protection and let editors make appropriate changes. Otherwise I vote for the deletion of this article (which contains merely the career) . NasrinatWiki (talk) 16:40, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Mr. Mueen-Uddin is a trustee of Muslim AId

I have corrected an information on this article which is now removed. At present Mr. Mueen-Uddin is not the chairman of Muslim Aid. He is one of the trustees. You can check the fact following these links.

http://www.muslimaid.org/index.php/about-us/governance http://www.muslimaid.org/index.php/media-centre/495-response-to-pakistan-floods-

This article refers to BBC news (dated 2003) which refers Mr. Mueen-Uddin as the chairman. But the website of Muslim Aid and media news (dated 2010) say that the chairman of Muslim AId is Sir Iqbal Sacranie, Not Mr. Mueen-Uddin. I am going to add this information. PLease let me know any problem regarding this issue. NasrinatWiki (talk) 05:21, 4 December 2010 (UTC)