Talk:Bangladesh

Archives
Archive 1	Archive 2

Template:Featured article is only for Wikipedia:Featured articles.

Bangladesh received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Template:0.5 nom

Software: Computing Unassessed

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software 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.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Pics

with 2 pics gone, are we a bit too low on pic count? Maybe its fine, I don't know.--ppm 02:47, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

related...boat or shat gombuj mosque (if we must chose)? I would say boat, just because its so quintessential. and we already have 2 other pics on structures--ppm 02:50, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you have to make a choice, the boat image, I think, should be there. You can replace the shat gombuj mosque, though in that case, the boat image would be placed in a rather inappropriate location. The satelite image is so nice, but still, can it be removed from the economy section? Another point, what is the difficulty in adding one or 2 pics beside the "notes", a la Kerala? --Dwaipayanc 05:10, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with the idea.--ppm 06:27, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

satellite back in geo--ppm 06:35, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are some cosmetic changes that I think will make the article a little bit nicer:

Moving some pics to the left (like Kerala and India)
Reducing the size of the pic in the subdivisions section to make it 'fit' (~200px would be fine)
Moving the templates like 'sisterlinks', 'indic text' and 'portal' to the Notes section

What do you think about them? Are they worth implementing? I could make these changes myself but I think there has to be some general agreement in favour of this (moving pics left goes against the MOS AFAIK). Also, we could move one or two pics to the notes section. There is no difficulty involved in that, it just needs some more opinion before being done. Sheehan (Talk) 03:51, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we should wait till FAC comes to a conclusion? I am not against the ideas per se, though.--ppm 04:25, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now that this is a FA, we could implement those changes. I've experimented with moving some pics left (only if a section has more than one pic, obviously) and it looks pretty nice to me. Sheehan (Talk) 08:33, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ranking according to Muslim Population

This article states that Bangladesh is ranked 3rd according to highest muslim population. It also sates that Bangladesh has a lower Muslim population than India, which is right. But it gives a wrong information. According to this article, India is 2nd and Bangladesh is 3rd according to highest muslim population. But actually India is 3rd and Bangladesh is 4th. Pakistan is ranked 2nd. Can someone please change this?Zarif

Done.--Dwaipayanc 14:01, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, that ranking was among muslim-majority nations, which India is not--ppm 21:19, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed it to "third largest Muslim-majority nation" which should be clearer. Green Giant 00:38, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ya, now it reads clearer.--Dwaipayanc 04:52, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

Congratulations to the editors of this article for making it featured, and thus, one of the best on Wikipedia. (See Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Featured log/April 2006). Pepsidrinka 05:36, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, congratulations to everyone who worked on it, or reviewed it to make it a featured article. Thanks. --Ragib 05:59, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Same here. congrats to all editors and all meticulous readers pointing out errors--ppm 06:07, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CONGRATS. --Dwaipayanc 06:12, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great job — I didn't even notice this had become featured so quickly until I checked just now. Beautiful and informative. Saravask 00:12, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratualtions to all the editors whose hard work brought about this excellent featured article. Green Giant 00:17, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations. Truthfully, my opinions do carry a slight bias since I'm from this country, but this really, really is one of the best articles in Wikipedia. It's far better than most other featured articles. A prime example of how many people working together can produce something amazing. Thanks to everyone who worked hard to improve this! Sheehan (Talk) 08:35, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A request for this article to appear as the featured article on the main page has been made. See Wikipedia talk:Tomorrow's featured article. Pepsidrinka 03:44, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great job! Congratulations.--Monmajhi 05:17, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't notice the FA status until now! Good work all. Idleguy 09:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bangladeshi Media

I am not sure why BBC and Voice of America gets mentioned and linked in the article and yet none from Bangladesh at all. We are talking about Bangladesh here aren't we ? Although bangla services of BBC & VOA are popular here, but the audience of Bangladesh Betar would comfotably outnumber BBC & VOA combined. Bangladesh Betar broadcasts almost 24 hours (except for a few hours I think), while the other 2 broadcasts only a few hours in total. As for TV, very few Bangladeshis watch BBC or CNN or VOA. Almost all of them, the overwhelming majority, watch local TV channels -- either the state-owned BTV (which also broadcasts terrestrially apart from being available from cable operators and thereby reaches anybody with a TV set even without a cable connection)or other private channels. Some people may watch some Indian Hindi channels for entertainment programmes, but surely not BBC or VOA [who don't have a Bengali Service for TV] , since a tiny minority here understands English. BBC or VOA don't deserve a mention here, unless actual BD media outlets are also mentioned and linked substantially. If that's not possible, please delete BBC & VOA. --69.71.132.241 05:12, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, I've added links to Bangladesh Betar and Bangladesh Television. Thanks. --Ragib 05:18, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I would've preferred deleting bbc & voa altogether though; I don't feel we need these two here. Anyway, I've 1 or 2 more obsevations. Are there any reservations regarding minor edits or corrections while an artcle gets FA status or is a candidate for it ?--Monmajhi 06:19, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think BBC and VOA are irrelevant in any way. Generally, most people in Bangladesh, in tea-stalls or otherwise, listen to BBC's nightly programmes almost every day. During various events and movement, the Government media is usually not trusted. So, people listen a lot to these two services, and their news programmes have a big impact.

As for your question, an article gets to FA status after a lot of refinement. It doesn't mean it can't be edited further, but usually, the major edits should be discussed. FA status is not for good; there is also a "Featured Article removal process" to root out featured articles that have strayed from being "among the best in wikipedia". Thanks. --Ragib 06:30, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

unfreindly?

Very few politicians have "friendly rivalries", what the point then?--ppm 19:10, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Desi politicians are unfriendly to the point of throwing grenades at each other. 69.116.150.174 19:27, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

World Records of Bangladesh

Dear Contributors

I have a suggestion. Why not list the world records of Bangladesh. But, I need suggestion about it. Would be listed in the page of Bangladesh or would it be listed in a separate page titled "World Records of Bangladesh"? e.g.

The longest sea beach (Cox's Bazar)
The largest river delta
Most corrupted country (Transparency International Survey)
The Happiest country (2005 World Happiness Survey), etc.

These things can be discusses too.

Asif Anwar (Pathik)

We can't really use the "world records" in this article. First of all, Bangladesh is now a featured article, with standard sections as specified for country articles. we shouldn't add needless sections which would only demote this article from featured article status. Next, some of the things you mentioned are not correct. Cox's Bazaar is not the longest sea beach, according to the Talk:Cox's Bazar District . The largest river delta is not only in Bangladesh, it includes parts of west bengal too. Most corrupt country nomination is quite disputed (though referenced a lot). Finally, this type of lists are not really encyclopedic, and are more suitable for newspapers rather than encyclopedias. Thanks. --Ragib 06:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Map?

What's with the map?--ppm 01:20, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there no mention of the Genocide in 1971? I would really be curious to hear from the editors.