Jump to content

Talk:Sheikh Mujibur Rahman

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Md Maruf Parvez (talk | contribs) at 16:12, 12 November 2022. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Former featured articleSheikh Mujibur Rahman is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on February 10, 2007.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 2, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
July 14, 2006Featured article candidatePromoted
May 12, 2009Featured article reviewDemoted
August 11, 2018Good article nomineeNot listed
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on January 8, 2020, August 15, 2020, and January 8, 2022.
Current status: Former featured article

Mujibur Rehman's imprisonment in Lyallpur jail

Sheikh Mujeebur Rehman was imprisoned in 1970 in Lyallpur, a city of Punjab in West Pakistan which has been renamed Faisalabad. He was represented by the country's most famous and respected lawyer Mr A K Brohi who was assisted by a prominent Lyallpur lawyer, Khawaja Ghulam Hussain. Sheikh Mujib ur Rehman, in his conversations with Mr A K Brohi and Khawaja Ghulam Hussain vehemently denied the accusation that he wanted to partition the country. He was most emphatic that he had only wanted a better representation for East Pakistan in the country's politics and was not at all interested in creating a new country. He had asked both his lawyers to be put in touch with the military, particularly General Yahya Khan. He particularly asked to be taken to be interviewed by the Pakistani press and radio so that he could reveal that his true intentions were never to divide the country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.110.205.96 (talk) 17:23, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Sheikh Mujibur Rahman

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Human Rights Watch":

  • From Jatiya Rakkhi Bahini: "Ignoring Executions and Torture : Impunity for Bangladesh's Security Forces" (PDF). Human Rights Watch. 2009-03-18. Retrieved 2013-08-16.
  • From Decolonisation of Asia: "Israel: 'Disengagement' Will Not End Gaza Occupation". Human Rights Watch. 29 October 2004. Retrieved 16 July 2010.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 09:35, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:19, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 28 June 2017

Please change the word "compromised" in the second sentence of the second paragraph to "comprised". Comprise means to consist of whereas compromise means to settle which does not make sense in this sentence. The author, I think, meant to say that the majority of the state's population consisted of Bengalis and thereby, use "comprised". It is very likely an error in input, but if the author meant to write "compromised", it has a very negative connotation. Ultimatepro1 (talk) 22:51, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done Simplexity22 (talk) 01:42, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Political judgments and near-diatribes presented as history

The article is rife with blatant and unsupported judgments on the tenor and value of Mujib's rule. This is far from a useful Wikipedia article.

Will you tell me that why do you feel so? If your arguement have point then maybe we can try solve it.Ominictionary (talk) 12:47, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Urdu name

Hi,

I think the Urdu name should be there because he was an important person in the history of Pakistan. Let's look at another article, like Muhammad Ali Pasha. It gives the native Albanian plus the Turkish and Arabic.

Ficusindica (talk) 14:31, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ Ficusindica, It is highly inappropriate to use his Urdu name. He was a Bengali nationalist leader and founding father of Bangladesh. This is what was his main identy. Urdu was not his native language. If you say that he was a important person in Pakistan's history then let me clear many foreigners are important in Pakistan's history (example: Lord Louis Mountbatten). But that doesn't mean that writing there name in Urdu is required. Ominictionary (talk)

Hi, I understand. But I think the word "inappropriate" is the result of a bias, and Wikipedia is not a place for biases. We should not have a bias against the Urdu language or a Pakistani identity even though he was a proponent of autonomy and independence. Urdu was not his native language, and everyone knows that very well, but he was still a Pakistani politician, for a long time, and an important one for that. Ficusindica (talk) 19:40, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ficusindica, Thank for replying and I apology if my word sound bias. But again Urdu is not necessary because he was not a national level politian in Pakistan he was a regional leader who wanted independence for his nation.− You can hold the article of Mamata Banerjee as an example. There wikipedia has only uses her native name. Despite being Indian, there is no use of Hindi.Ominictionary (talk)

You say that he was not a national level politician but he still won the national election and Momota Banerjee did not. Plus India is regionalist and they value the other languages and those regional identities as "national" identity. Pakistan is not the same and was not the same. Urdu and Urdu itself actually matters alongside Bebgali. Thanks. Ficusindica (talk) 13:06, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@But there is a simple point Ficusindica that his Urdu name is not notable. He is not known as a Pakistani polititian. Please accept that this change fails WP:GNG. Ominictionary (talk)

Hi. I'm sorry, it was actually me who wrote "At one point, he was a Pakistani, he won the national election, and he sought to be the leader of Pakistan." You say that the Urdu name is not notable, but as the other official language of Pakistan at the time, it is notable. For the fact that he was not a national-level politician, I already wrote that at one point, he was a Pakistani, he won the national election, and he sought to be the leader of Pakistan." Thank you.
Ficusindica (talk) 15:56, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Thanks for replying Ficusindica. But he is not notable as Pakistani politian. You tell me, how many Pakistani know him as a polititian. Officialy Pakistan goverment have very negative view on Mujib. (eg: Pakistan envoy in Dhaka summoned for distorting history, apology sought) Neither Pakistan ever regard as a leader nor Bengals have ever recognize Pakistan's culture and I am really not getting why its so important to add his Urdu name. Ominictionary (talk)

It is all this public opinion, by people, governments, and politicians that create biases. I try to just be objective, and recognize the simple fact that he became a leading politician in that union, however bad that union was, it was still an union at the time. Mujib sought to be the leader of Pakistan and won the election. That's reason enough to include both Urdu and Bengali. 2600:1017:B826:5218:1772:F6A5:7D4B:1844 (talk) 16:47, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@But I had asked all a question that how do you know as Mujib?? What is his main identy?? And again when he died, he died as a Bangladeshi president and polititian. He was not died Pakistani polititian. At last he was not pakistani. His native language was not Urdu. Its completely unnecessary. Ominictionary (talk) 16:53, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Never . I boldly protest against the using of Urdu name in this article . The reasons are :- 1. Pakistan and Bangladesh were rivals during the liberation war of Bangladesh . After the ending of the war Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was the most respected person in Bangladeshi history . So , if Urdu name is used in this article , it would be offencive for Bangladeshi people. 2. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman , even though was voted to be the president of combined Pakistan, he was not able to become the president due to conspiracy . This was one of the reasons why the liberation war of Bangladesh began. So , he was not a notable person in the history of Pakistan. Wholecube (talk) 17:00, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi , Ficusindica . You said that Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was an important person in the history of Pakistan . But his name is not even mentioned in the article , History of Pakistan . So he is not an important person in the history of Pakistan . Wholecube (talk) 17:05, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ Plz show me one verified article or a book, anything reliable which portray him as a Pakistani polititian or a Pakistani person. Then I will accept your arguement. I am not sounding any bias here and I am confident about it. Whatever I am saying is based on critical thinking. I am the one who had gave the article reference about corruption and mismaintence of Mujib goverment, I am the one who gave the information of Mujib's negative portrayal in The Black Coat. If I am so biased and so pro Mujib then tell me why I did this. I am debating about something which I beleive unnecessary, but that doesn't give anyone right of accusing me for being bias. Ominictionary (talk) 17:09, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ominictionary, I am not accusing you of bias. I think people and even politicians think often think in a biased fashion. For example, Wholecube says something will be offensive for Bangladeshis, so it should not be in Wikipedia. This should not affect the information that is provided in Wikipedia of course. As to his notably as a politician in Pakistan, isn't he important because he divided Pakistan. The Urdu article in Wikipedia has less information after only English and Bengali. I am losing interest somewhat and I don't know how much I want to argue. But anyway, I'm not accusing you. Thanks. Ficusindica (talk) 20:22, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:25, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 December 2017

[1]

The source of this reference is returning a 404 error. We can add http://www.somewhereinblog.net/blog/nanabhai/29563336 this article as an alternative source. That means the reference should look like this:

[1] Zach Donald (talk) 06:50, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b ওরা জাতির পিতাকে সম্মান দিতে ব্যর্থ হয়েছে [They have failed to honor the Father of the Nation]. Amar Desh (in Bengali). 20 March 2012. Retrieved 25 May 2013. {{cite news}}: Invalid |script-title=: missing prefix (help) Cite error: The named reference "amardeshonline.com" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
Not done: @Zach Donald: www.somewhereinblog.net/blog/ is not a reliable source, so it should not be used as a reference. See Wikipedia:Link rot for an explanation of the best way to deal with dead links. This dead link has been repaired. --Worldbruce (talk) 07:31, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 21 December 2017

It is done by us. How can I prove ownership? One way is to call the number mentioned on this page https://www.facebook.com/bangabandhu.me/ Because it is posted on this page first — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robinpaul.usa (talk • contribs) 15:25, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Please add this Viral 3D photo of bangabandhu http://i.pi.gy/O1RxO.png Robinpaul.usa (talk) 14:57, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Robinpaul.usa:  Not done. Wikipedia is really strict about images because, if they're owned by someone, we would have to pay them or risk getting sued. CityOfSilver 15:17, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Phonetic transcription of "Jatir Pita"

User Ominictionary has insisted [1] that a correct phonetic transcription be used for the title of "Jatir Pita" for Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, particularly a transcription based on the International Phonetic Alphabet. I, Ficusindica have insisted that the conventional method of transcribing Bengali on Wikipedia be used. The information on this conventional method of transcription has been on the article on Romanization of Bengali [2] but has since been removed under alligation of original research but is frequently used on Wikipedia (see Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, Prime Minister of Bangladesh or the Jatiya Sangsad). A lengthy use of this system can be found in a transcription of Jana Gana Mana from 20 July 2015 to 5 September 2016.

My opinion is that we use this particular method of phonetic transcription, thus transcribing "Jatir Pita" as Jatir Pita based on the system and the pronunciation in Bengali.
Ficusindica (talk) 23:34, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Sheikh Mujibur Rahman/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Carabinieri (talk · contribs) 02:12, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Hi, User:Ominictionary, you've indicated on your user page that you're retired. Does this mean you'll be unable to address issues during this review? Is anyone else willing to jump in?--Carabinieri (talk) 02:14, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will do it in case User:Ominictionary does not.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 20:09, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'll get started on the review and post my first comments in the next couple of days.--Carabinieri (talk) 06:54, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Vinegarymass911, here are someinitial comments.

  • The article really needs some copyediting. There are grammatical issues. Some parts assume knowledge of South Asian history most readers won't have. Some of the prose is just hard to understand.
  • The article mixes different referencing styles. There also issues some of the footnotes. Here are some examples:
    • Footnote 3 is a YouTube video.
    • Footnote 8 only gives "99—" as the page range.
    • Footnote 12 needs a page number.
    • Footnote 17: unclear what this refers to. Is this a book?
    • Footnote 22: also needs a page number.

Are these things you can work on?--Carabinieri (talk) 21:43, 29 July 2018 (UTC) In light of Omnidictionary's retirement, I'm afraid it won't be possible at this time to bring the article up to GA standard, so I'm going to close the nomination.--Carabinieri (talk) 03:17, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 19 July 2018

Father: Sheikh Lutfur Rahman

Mother: Sayera Khatun Mahedi636580 17:15, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 17:48, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Turmoil"...

"Mujib's death plunged the nation into many years of political turmoil... Order was largely restored after a coup in 1977..." --Yomal Sidoroff-Biarmskii (talk) 16:36, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The year 1977 is wrong, I changed it to 1976. LucrativeOffer (talk) 10:55, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2019

I designed the 3D Model of Bangabandhu. I think it is a very high-quality 3D Model. Adding this will bost our pride in Wikipedia

Bangabandhu 3D Image Robinpaul.usa (talk) 16:05, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. - FlightTime (open channel) 16:18, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 4 April 2021

Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was born in TUNGIPARA, BANGLADESH not Tongipara, India. 210.4.67.42 (talk) 08:51, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: The Early Life section of this article states that Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was born in Tungipara, a sub-district in Bangladesh. Sincerely, Deauthorized. (talk) 15:58, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why are there not many articles on major laws passed in the terms of Mujib Administration from 1971 to 1975?

Many important laws passed under the presidents or prime ministers are considered to show the significance and achievements of an administration. While there are many blanket statements, saying Indian control of economy began and counterfeit scandals increase; nothing wrong with them but where are the statistics to prove them? A book was cited but in that book there are no statistics or figures given about those blanket statements. The laws passed and executive orders signed are the most important things when considering accomplishments of a leader, there are almost none in the entire page. The constitutional amendments passed under his administration are also missing. The many social welfare programs such as food stamps and other programs are not mentioned anywhere on the page.

Semi-protected edit request on 11 November 2021

He became popular for his opposition to the ethnic and institutional discrimination of Bengalis in Pakistan, who comprised the majority of the state's population.

Change who comprise to which comprise Abir290 (talk) 16:26, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: "Bengalis" are people and therefore you use "who" (if you're not sure, think as though this was a question: it's "Who comprised the majority of the state's population?", not "Which [...]?"). The article is correct as it stands. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 01:20, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 6 December 2021

I would like to add new resources in the General Sources for detailed information on this topic.

HJKNJ (talk) 07:02, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. Those aren't random books listed, they are used as references for information in the article. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 07:24, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 30 December 2021

add Cult of personality in see also section. 103.230.107.47 (talk) 08:31, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Even if there are reliable sources, it can be dealt with and linked to in the article text. --Hemanthah (talk) 11:59, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Naming convention

Hey guys,

I noticed that in some points of this article, we refer to Sheikh Mujibur Rahman as "Sheikh Mujib" and at other points as "Mujib". Just offering my two cents here, but I think the former is probably more appropriate than the latter because it recognizes that he is a Sheikh, coming from a Sheikh family, which commands respect.

Which should we go with? Should we refer to him as Sheikh Mujib or Mujib?

Thanks in advance! Historicamatic (talk) 22:22, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Historicamatic: Mujib will be better. Mehedi Abedin 17:19, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This link is a dead link. Needlessly so. The link ends with ".html". This should be ".htm". https://archive.thedailystar.net/2005/08/15/d5081501033.htm Musicmouse (talk) 17:45, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

About the lead section

@Solomon The Magnifico:, @AMomen88:, @SalamAlayka:, @Vinegarymass911:, and @Md Maruf Parvez: please don't do edit war for the lead section of the article. Please discuss before doing anything. You all can discuss here and reach consensus. Mehedi Abedin 11:05, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AMomen88: wants to remove the term "Bengali" and said it is "grotesque" to call him Bengali. Does this make any sense? The sentence already mentions him as the founder of Bangladesh. Since he is the "friend of Bengal", why exclude the term "Bengali"? Was he a non-Bengali founder of Bangladesh? Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 11:07, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@AMomen88: I would suggest that you read the Bangladeshi nationalism article. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and his government were Bengali nationalists, and used the term Bengalee in the national constitution. This also one of the reasons why the Chittagong Hill Tracts conflict arose. Bangladeshi nationalism came about after his assassination, by the Bangladesh Nationalist Party. SalamAlayka (talk) 12:35, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SalamAlayka:, @Solomon The Magnifico: I’m not denying that Sheikh Mujib was a Bengali, but every article on Wikipedia about an individual starts with their nation's demonym not their ethnicity so it’s not appropriate having the term Bengali. Does Mamata Banerjee start off with her ethnicity or her nationality? It truly is grotesque to have one rule apply to this article and another for all the other articles. This has nothing to do with political persuasions, this is about nationality– it is a matter of fact that Mujib's nationality was a Bangladeshi not Bengali which was his ethnicity.—AMomen88 (talk) 16:24, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@AMomen88: Muhammad Ali Jinnah does not even include any ethnic or national identity. Plus, its a fair point Sheikh Mujib preferred the term "Bengali". The constitution under Sheikh Mujib recognized citizens of Bangladesh as Bengali.--Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 16:57, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If you all want, then I can propose a better lead section that can satisfy both party and can solve all issue you all pointed. @SalamAlayka: @Solomon The Magnifico: @AMomen88: Mehedi Abedin 16:44, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mehediabedin: That would be very helpful, but it is important to note that for a considerable period of time the lead section has started with his nationality and not his ethnicity so I am bemused why now suddenly his ethnicity has replaced his nationality.–AMomen88 (talk) 15:39, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Mehediabedin:: I think you should go for it & It should be considered that he liked to describe himself as a Bangali and he used to call the Bangladeshi people as Banglai. We are alsomentioned Bangali in our constitution. If Bangladeshi is writen in a different part, that will be less confusing as we were not Bagladeshi before 1971. Maruf Parvez ❯❯❯ Talk 16:10, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sheikh_Mujibur_Rahman&oldid=1121496616"