Talk:2018 Bangladesh road-safety protests

Rape news

@A.Musketeer: Before re-adding the news of rape again, please explain where does this source say anything about the rape of 4 students???? - Editor General of Wiki (talk) 20:51, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

According to protesters, 4 female students of Bir Shreshtha Noor Mohammad Public College were taken to Bangladesh Awami League office and raped brutally by BCL cadres.

References

You didn't even bother to look at my edit summaries. I have already explained the news about rape is there in the videos shared by Dhaka Tribune in the link provided. A.Musketeer (talk) 21:03, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

@A.Musketeer: Clearly, you don't have any idea about what an WP:RS is. A facebook video where a person tells something, we can not add that to Wikipedia. We need sources which have editorial integrity. These links are just embedding of facebook videos, not secondary or WP:RS. Better find a quality source for this sensitive issue. - Editor General of Wiki (talk) 21:11, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

The video was shared by Dhaka Tribune and the microphones also belonged to different media outlets. I think you are not competent about WP:CITEVIDEO, please take a look. The appropriateness depends on the context. A.Musketeer (talk) 21:22, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Perhaps walk back the antagonism a bit with regard to the assumed competence of other editors. I'd suggest that WP:CITEVIDEO isn't entirely clear about an embed of a social media video, on a probably reliable news site, when said site is running a live-stream of stuff they grabbed up on an evolving crisis. It's not uncommon with these pseudo-social-pseudo-news type pages for unconfirmed information and information that wouldn't meet normal editorial standards to be included just because nobody really knows yet. I mean it's a step up from a tweet from a journalist on the scene. But it's questionable whether WP:RS applies. The BBC in this case probably does constitute a WP:RS but all it is reliable of is a single allegation and as such, that line could probably use some finessing for clarity. And the Daily Star article is pretty clear that the claims of sexual assault were "speculative" and that they were formally denied by one of the parties. All in all I think the para needs to be tweaked a bit, but subtly, to more accurately reflect what the reliable sources can confirm. I can have a go. I don't really have a horse in this race, but I'd suggest the situation is more ambiguous than either of the parties above is presenting it. Simonm223 (talk) 17:23, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

• "Clearly, you don't have any idea about..." (Editor of General of Wiki)
• "I think you are not competent about..." (A.Musketeer)

The antagonism is going both ways, just worded a little differently. Perhaps both editors should just focus more on content and less on each other. - ^theWOLFchild 15:29, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Reddit Live thread

There is a Reddit Live thread, if needed, for more sources: https://old.reddit.com/live/11e4mknpbhjqr/ Sherenk1 (talk) 10:36, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

International Coverage

Please add anything you wanna write in the actual wiki page here.

Remarked lightheartedly with a smiling face

For a response to the incident, Shajahan Khan did remark lightheartedly with a smiling face. There is video evidence for this. Please discuss it in this page before removing this phrase. --Kaisernahid (talk) 08:17, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

WP:SYNTH applies here. If a source remarks on Shajahan Khan's demeanor it might warrant mention, with a cite to the source. But for Wikipedia to comment on the assumed mood of a face on a video seems a stretch. Simonm223 (talk) 17:31, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Eminent/Respected photographer

About these edits: [1][2]. IMO, they look like WP:PEACOCK words, that's why I removed them. He is wikilinked to his own article, that is enough. Opinions, editors? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:03, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

NPOV

• "forcibly abducted"
• "came under attack by the government's labor union wing"
• "Police attacked students of private universities in Dhaka and used tear gas and rubber bullets to disperse the protesters"

Folks there are neutral ways to post these sorts of things. "Police used tear gas and rubber bullets to disperse the protesters" without claiming they were "attacked". Please do better, this article is featured on the main page. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:50, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

I've seen a lot of issues with WP:NPOV throughout the article. I've tried to adjust some of the most egregious examples but in general it'd be great if editors would refrain from inserting statements of personal opinion, synthesized comments and weasel words into the article. Simonm223 (talk) 12:34, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Fix the lede

There's some pretty serious WP:SYNTH in the lede. The two cited sources for "the student wing of the governing Bangladesh Awami League" attacking journalists are an AP article which does not mention BAL at all, only referring to pro-government protestors as members of a political group's youth wing, and an article from Dhaka Today which doesn't mention the identity of any attackers. I'm going to tweak it for now to something more balanced but I think it needs a more expert editor to make some further fixes which reflect the situation on the ground and reflect a neutral stance. Simonm223 (talk) 11:56, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

There are numerous sources which identifiesthe attackers as BCL activists (Bangladesh Chhatraleague).

[3], [4], [5] - Editor General of Wiki (talk) 12:35, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

One of the sources you provided I have questions on reliability - Prothomalo. The others use the same purported-to-be and alledged-to-be language that seems common with articles about this situation. Which is what we should reflect here. Simonm223 (talk) 13:16, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Upon doing some research it appears Prothomalo is in fact a major media outlet; the grammar of the article you linked just threw me. Still, I think at this time, considering how fluid the situation is, it'd be inappropriate for us to unambiguously state "this group which denies responsibility for the violence is definitely who did it." Simonm223 (talk) 13:20, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Corroborating Daily Star material

I've been reading up on the Daily Star and I have concerns about the reliability of it as a sole source. Specifically, the paper has a long history of antagonism and hostility toward BAL and Sheikh Hasnia, including publishing uncorroborated claims of corruption which they later had to walk back. This source is being consistently used as a sole source for claims of BAL participation in counter-protests, which is somewhat alarming considering this history. I would suggest, where possible, that claims which seem exclusive to anonymous staff correspondents at the Daily Star should be corroborated by another reliable source before we treat them as fact. Simonm223 (talk) 16:36, 8 August 2018 (UTC).

Other newspapers like prothom alo, bdnews24, iinternational media reports it too. There are also reports of press censorship as with Ekattur TV. The Daily Staris the leading English daily news paper in our country, and why should your POV analysis and research matter, also you clearly show biassedness towards Awami League, and made your statemen—ts based on personal perception. Daily star is a neutral newspaper and has always made positive and negative posts about Awami League and its rival political parties depending on what actually goes on. Your individual politically motivated opinion does not matter, nor are you an admin as you are acting like! 43.245.123.236 (talk) 17:24, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Ok guys I'm going to level with you, I didn't even know who the Awami League were until this article came to my attention and I decided to help out based on my past experience with the Urumqi riots page. I certainly don't have a horse in this race. But what I can tell you from my past experience working on pages to do with political riots is that it's best to use corroborating sources for any extraordinary statements of fact such as, "the ruling party inserted counter-protesters to attack protesters with police protection." If true that's significant. But if your basis for asserting that fact is a single newspaper with an obvious long-standing bias against the ruling party, that's more troublesome. Simonm223 (talk) 17:47, 8 August 2018 (UTC).

What proof do you have about this alleged biassedness? The Daily Star (Bangladesh) is a leading newspaper in our country and have been used as a source in multiple Bangladesh articles, check older newses before the protests, it has so many pro government articles. Numerous other sources domestic and international states there were attacks by pro government men on protesters too. There has never been an allegation of biasedness of the daily star before. Sorry if what I said was kinda rude, but this is fact. 43.245.122.208 (talk) 17:56, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Furthermore, as for me acting like an admin, I have done literally one edit that constituted a whole-cloth reversion and have otherwise just adjusted content to reflect sources provided on the article. I have expressed concerns about the reliability of two sources, on talk, and subsequently walked back one of those concerns after doing due diligence and finding my concerns unfounded (this was Prothom Alo). If you think working to massage WP:NPOV in a riot article, and expressing skepticism of online sources with no byline and a masthead with a history of antagonism toward one of the parties in the conflict constitutes "acting like an admin" I'd suggest you should probably widen the range of articles you follow on Wikipedia. Simonm223 (talk) 18:00, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

With regard to a history of antagonism with the ruling party of Bangladesh I'd suggest you review https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35594968 Simonm223 (talk) 18:04, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

The source you provided just supports my point. There are press censorship by the ruling party on news media in our country. Daily Star, Prothom All, bdnews24 are few medias free from this and states face. The article you gave as a source rather praises the daily star for its independent unbiased reporting, anyone who visiting can find out. It also had issues with other rival parties of the ruling party too. But never have they been accused of reporting news based on ant government sentiments, nor anyone argues that daily star is unreliable. CNN is called anti republican, but there has never been any proven facts stating it as unreliable other than President Trump's accussition. That type of hostility does not exist between the ruling party and the daily star other than some issues like the one you showed which happened 2 years back in 2016. If you see older posts, you will see countless pro government articles on daily star and its stand against rival political parties. An example is opposition party Bangladesh Nationalist Party criticized the daily star for pro governement (pro Awami league) reports: https://dailyasianage.com/news/10218/bnp-criticizes-daily-stars-role-during-crisis-on-democracy .There is no evidence daily star is unreliable, and it is recognized worldwide as independent, unbiased a leading English newspaper in Bangladesh, free from forced censorship. 43.245.122.208 (talk) 18:18, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

It's irrelevant how you interpret the slant of the article I included. What matters is the facts reported. That there is a history, stretching back decades, of antagonism between the editor of the Daily Star and the current government of Bangladesh. Wikipedia isn't supposed to be taking sides in conflicts. We're supposed to be reporting what can be reliably demonstrated by outside sources. I am questioning the reliability of this source, particularly in cases where no specific journalists' by-line is on an article, not because of any disagreement with the source, I am honestly neutral in this regard, but because I believe there's reason to doubt that their reportage is providing an undistorted picture of the situation-on-the-ground in an evolving crisis. As you haven't been editing wikipedia long I understand this distinction may be unclear to you, but I would ask you to assume good faith. When I've said previously that my interest is largely because I have past experience with articles about riots, I'm being 100% honest and above board. Simonm223 (talk) 18:25, 8 August 2018 (UTC).

All you claim is POV. See my source, it also has rivalry with opposition party BNP, all political parties criticize media if they report against them, that does not mean the report is not factual: https://dailyasianage.com/news/10218/bnp-criticizes-daily-stars-role-during-crisis-on-democracy 43.245.122.208 (talk) 18:30, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

People who has any prior knowledge about Bangladesh knows that Bangladesh is under press censorship. AFP photographer was beaten mercilessly in front of police. One freelance photographer was injured just 3 feet away from a police box (small police station). One TV channel was forced to shut down its live coverage. Another TV channel has been formally warned for its live coverage. Photographer Shahidul Alam has been first abducted and later shown as arrested after his interview with al jazeera. Under these circumstances, many journalists are afraid to report the actual events. The Daily Star (Bangladesh) is the leading English newspaper of Bangladesh and has been maintaining a fearless role. As a Bangladeshi citizen and reader of The Daily Star (Bangladesh) for the last 2 decades, I find it depressing that someone is accusing The Daily Star (Bangladesh) as unreliable. Being said that, I will add other sources (including Bengali) to corroborate daily star reports where applicable. --Kaisernahid (talk) 10:12, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Please restore my routine grammar fixes

User:Logan11111112 when you made your last edit to the page, you inadvertently reverted my routine grammar corrections to the previous, grammatically incorrect form. I do not want to be accused of edit warring, so I would respectfully ask that you please fix that error yourself. Simonm223 (talk) 13:27, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

ok, sorry i didn't see, i am restoring now, give me 1 minute. Logan11111112 (talk) 13:29, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Simonm223, Done. Logan11111112 (talk) 13:32, 9 August 2018 (UTC)