Talk:Non-cooperation movement (2024)

Latest comment: 4 days ago by Wrzedn in topic Removal of R&AW of India from Infobox

Semi-protected edit request on 16 August 2024 (2)

edit

Please change the title of this article to 2024 Bangladesh uprising as it was marred by violence. 2409:408C:BE39:CF03:0:0:B149:6D0F (talk) 19:22, 16 August 2024 (UTC)Reply


It can also be renamed, "2024 Bangladesh violence"-2409:408C:BE39:CF03:0:0:B149:6D0F (talk) 19:39, 16 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Not done: Edit requests are for non-controversial and neutral edits to an article that the requestor cannot action themselves. Changing the title of an article tends to be a de facto controversial action given it's effect on readers. This is compounded by the talk page banner explicitly stating the content of this article may be contentious. Please establish a consensus for this change. —Sirdog (talk) 22:36, 16 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
Nope, as the reliable sources named it Non-cooperation movement, we don't need to rename it. Mehedi Abedin 04:14, 17 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Why is not there a massive coup in 2024? Read the details.

edit

No one referred to the 2024 mass uprising as a non-cooperation movement. So the title should be "2024 Bangladesh mass uprising. Abdullah.al.zarif.khan.wiki (talk) 05:40, 29 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Abdullah.al.zarif.khan.wiki I think you are misunderstanding. This is not about the uprising. The article is about the non-cooperation movement started from 3 August and many reliable sources call it as non-cooperation movement. There is no question of changing its name to 2024 Bangladesh mass uprising. Mehedi Abedin 08:37, 29 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Removal of R&AW of India from Infobox

edit

I said this in 2024 Bangladesh quota reform movement article talk page and I'll say it here. Let me preface this by saying that I'm an Indian so the accusations and counter-accusations can be avoided. Now coming to the point So far only one source supports R&AW being involved on behalf of Hasina. The Source itself is nowhere to be found on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. We should either cite more high quality reliable sources or drop R&AW altogether. DataCrusade1999 (talk) 10:40, 7 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

I've removed the reference to R&AW in the article as I believe it needs (probably more than one) reliable national/international sources. Thanks! Wrzedn (talk) 13:24, 7 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
Just for clarification, I removed this before I saw your post here. If other editors are interested, they can use this space to discuss whether to keep that info out or bring it back. Wrzedn (talk) 13:30, 7 September 2024 (UTC)Reply