Talk:Non-cooperation movement (2024)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Results format

hey guys.... i add Hasina's resign to the result and yet the page nvr appears.... how? @Wiki N Islam@Bruno pnm ars Foxy Husky (talk) 10:06, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Vandalism and bias

There's this user named User:Defendziaur, which i'm pretty sure is inspired by Ziaur Rahman. And he has been doing some vandalism and editing some unbiased stuff without citation. Is there anything we can do?

Need your help @R1F4T, @Addo Adwin, @Mehedi Abedin, @মোহাম্মদ জনি হোসেন, @ApurboWiki2024 Bruno pnm ars (talk) 20:50, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bruno pnm ars If its true then warn them on their talk page, if they do the same after three warnings then report them to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, if you don't get any response from them then report them to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. But what they did? You should give us an example. Mehedi Abedin 17:33, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Appropriate title

The article needs an appropriate title. Alternative option is to merge it with the "quota reform movement" article. Wrzedn (talk) 12:19, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

I suggest the article to be Bangladeshi Revolution , because that's what it's the overthrow of the BD gov Waleed (talk) 12:20, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

doesn't sound right. i understand the emotion but let's name it what it is! Wrzedn (talk) 12:28, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

I suggest 2024 Bangladesh mass uprising cause it was a mass movement Wiki N Islam (talk) 12:28, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

sounds too poetic, mate! Wrzedn (talk) 12:33, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Bangladesh had witnessed mass uprising in 1969 and 1990, so this title is not new. Wiki N Islam (talk) 12:51, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

good point! Wrzedn (talk) 12:52, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

I would probably suggest a title like Overthrow of Sheikh Hasina. Image2012 (talk) 13:09, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

 Disagree thats.... a bit extreme Foxy Husky (talk) 13:16, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Disagree Wiki N Islam (talk) 14:12, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Disagree Wrzedn (talk) 14:26, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

• 2024 Bangladesh Anti-Government protests was better than the current title. 2024 Bangladesh mass uprising also sounds good. Nomian (talk) 12:38, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

  "2024 Bangladesh anti-government protests" sounds better than the one currently we have. Wrzedn (talk) 12:43, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

  Neutral: tbh... anti-government protest should also includes 2024 Bangladesh quota reform movement since the movements also hv anti-government revolution Foxy Husky (talk) 13:09, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

  It seems like those are good titles. I'm guessing the treatment would be similar to the articles for Euromaidan and Revolution of Dignity. Image2012 (talk) 13:58, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

  We should follow what the most reliable sources says and from what I’ve seen, most refer to it as "Anti government protests," so let's rename it accordingly. I understand that opinions on the title may vary and that this could be controversial. If necessary, we can initiate an RFC to address the issue. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:13, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

  It's not the name. Non-Bangladeshi medias also referred the quota movement as anti-government protests. Any protests against government is anti-govt. The protests is still refered as Non-cooperation movement, at least officially. Wiki N Islam (talk) 14:45, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

  Agree with @Wiki N Islam Lahsim Niasoh (talk) 14:55, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

  actually Bangladesh protests (2022–24) alr exists so we need someone to help editing this plz Foxy Husky (talk) 16:35, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

  Pinning for discussion: @Bruno pnm ars, @Mehedi Abedin, @Zkabirkhan, @R1F4T, @মোহাম্মদ জনি হোসেন, @Addo Adwin, @Lahsim Niasoh, @ApurboWiki2024 Wiki N Islam (talk) 14:49, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

  I think title should be 2024 Bangladesh mass uprising. ApurboWiki2024 (talk) 15:09, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

 Disagree article Bangladesh protests (2022–24) alr exists....

just need someone to help editing there plz thxs Foxy Husky (talk) 16:37, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Disagree no need to do that. We have already Bangladesh protests (2022–24), but we could rename Bangladesh protests (2022–24) to 2024 Bangladesh mass uprising. This is my personal opinion although. But Renaming is unnecessary because its title is backed by reliable sources. Mehedi Abedin 17:28, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

The article should be 2024 Bangladesh mass uprising. ApurboWiki2024 (talk) 18:36, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

New articles needed

We need article named Resignation of Sheikh Hasina (currently a redirect to Non-cooperation movement (2024)). This recent event meets WP:GNG and we can create it based on Resignation of Jacinda Ardern. There should be plenty of sources about it. Mehedi Abedin 17:36, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bruno pnm ars, @Zkabirkhan, @R1F4T, @মোহাম্মদ জনি হোসেন, @Addo Adwin, @Lahsim Niasoh, @ApurboWiki2024 @Wiki N Islam Mehedi Abedin 17:37, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

I created a new article titled Long March to Dhaka. ApurboWiki2024 (talk) 18:37, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

I support. And should be. ApurboWiki2024 (talk) 18:39, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Just because there's coverage doesn't mean we need to create a new article for every event related to this. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 20:00, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

@Saqib I am not only talking about coverages. The topic passes WP:GNG. If it is passed under guidelines of Wikipedia then we can create the article. But we should merge Long March to Dhaka into Non-cooperation movement (2024) because it is a short term event. Mehedi Abedin 20:17, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Also, even the resignation is related to the Non-cooperation movement, it is part of Sheikh Hasina's political life. So it is important in the Bangladeshi history. Mehedi Abedin 20:18, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Requested move

This article should be renamed Non-cooperation movement (2024). Other NCMs were also named like this. One point movement isn't an official name. And NCM will start from tomorrow. Today, only the declaration was called. @R1F4T, @Bruno pnm ars, @Addo Adwin, @Mehedi Abedin, @মোহাম্মদ জনি হোসেন, @Mollathevalor, @ApurboWiki2024 Wiki N Islam (talk) 15:22, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

I recommend naming it the "2024 Non-Cooperation Movement" in alignment with recent articles published by The Daily Star and Dhaka Tribune. Bruno pnm ars (talk) 17:07, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

We have other articles named Non-cooperation movement, Non-cooperation movement (1971), Non-cooperation movement (1919–22). I just meant to change the title & date. Wiki N Islam (talk) 17:39, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Support Mehedi Abedin 05:27, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Redirect the article currently titled 'One Point Demand Movement' to 'Non-cooperation Movement' to accurately reflect its association with the 2024 quota reform movement. Zkabirkhan (talk) 08:26, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Where are the other info about 3rd August in the article from the timeline. Zkabirkhan (talk) 10:07, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Is there any further explanation why they moved their "March to Dhaka" program from 6th to 5th? Because people need time and preparation to reach Dhaka Zkabirkhan (talk) 18:52, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Do we have sufficient reliable sources confirming the name of this anti-government protest as Non-cooperation movement ? --— Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:34, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

@Saqib Yes, we have sources for it. For example, read this. Mehedi Abedin 20:30, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Name of the movement

for this article, is it ok to rename to 'One Point Demand Movement' or just stick with current name? @Wiki N Islam @Zkabirkhan (just for clarification) Foxy Husky (talk) 04:04, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

It was formerly renamed with consensus. Long March to Dhaka fall under the Non-cooperation movement and it has became a universal name. I don't support renaming. Wiki N Islam (talk) 04:13, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

ic.... but in case of other articles that have redirction link to this article like 2024 Bangladesh quota reform movement, is it ok to put One Point Demand Movement or go with NCM (non-cooperation movement)? Foxy Husky (talk) 04:32, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Don’t support renaming it, as per @Wiki N Islam Bruno pnm ars (talk) 07:10, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

I think One Point Demand Movement should be the WP:COMMONNAME and WP:OFFICIALNAME. All English newspapers and foreign news channels like- Alzajeera, DW News use the term "One-Point Demand Movement". Robo^Cric Let's chat 08:30, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

@RoboCric Should we only consider English-language sources only? Even English sources based on Bangladeshi websites call it Non-cooperation movement. Non-cooperation movement is the common name here. It is also the official name. Mehedi Abedin 20:33, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Proposal for the movement's ending

To me, we can close the non-cooperation movement after student's demand of the formation of an interim government by their choice and the election of a democratic government by people are met. What do you all think? Mehedi Abedin 20:29, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes. To me, now we can close the Non-cooperation movement 2024 and 2024 Quota Reform Movement. ApurboWiki2024 (talk) 20:30, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Not now because we don't know what will happen later. If students say that their demands are met then we can close non-cooperation movement. Mehedi Abedin 20:35, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

@Mehedi Abedin, I also think so. We don’t know what will happen after even if the demand is accepted by now.
Thank you!
By Piruty Pipaty (talk) 23:00, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Military takeover

Need Bangla speakers to verify if General W is taking charge as interim. Borgenland (talk) 18:51, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Borgenland, According to reports, Salimullah Khan and Asif Nazrul are expected to lead the interim government, but it's too early to confirm anything for certain. Also, don’t you think it’s too early to have an article like this: Interim Government of Waker uz Zaman? — Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:54, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

If the translators are right. It seems General W is in charge. Borgenland (talk) 01:48, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Let's make it a draft for now. After getting more sources and update, it can be moved to mainspace. Mehedi Abedin 20:14, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Moved to Draft:Interim Government of Waker uz Zaman. Mehedi Abedin 20:23, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Starting date

@Mehedi Abedin, @Bruno pnm ars, @Zkabirkhan, @Dilbaggg, @মোহাম্মদ জনি হোসেন, @ApurboWiki2024, @Addo Adwin, @R1F4T, @Mollathevalor we are lacking a universal consensus about the starting date of the movement: 3 August of 4 August. I support the date 4 August. Because on 3 August, the declaration was called that movement will start from the next day, that is 4 August. The section 3 August of the article should be moved to the quota protests article except the key infos for this protest, which can be added to the background section. Wiki N Islam (talk) 10:20, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

In my opinion, starting date is 3 August evening.Addo Adwin (talk) 11:02, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Starting date is 4th of August.In the 3rd august they just declare the topic. R1F4T (talk) 11:05, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

I think we can move some of the information of 3 August to the Background section. That's it. Mehedi Abedin 05:43, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Naming and status

Non-Cooperation movement was a name specifically used for August 4, it was a one day event, the events of August 5 are separate and was titled long march movement, both are part of the one point demand and the article should be named back as one point demand. Dilbaggg (talk) 05:39, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Also note sources do not state its ongoing anymore, it has ended as of now and this is supported by source. No source links any event after August 5 with this protest and the demands of the protests have been met, any event after that is not part of this and there are no sources stating any further events related to this and its pure WP:OR to claim its ongoing, for now it has ended. Dilbaggg (talk) 05:49, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

I think we should take several days before taking any decision regarding ending of this movement. "both are part of the one point demand" – Not true, students started non-cooperation movement based on One point demand. long march movement is part of the non-cooperation movement, not one point demand movement. This is a source that proves my point উৎকণ্ঠা নিয়ে অসহযোগের দ্বিতীয় দিনে বাংলাদেশ. Mehedi Abedin 06:56, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

@Mehedi Abedin as of now it is considered to have concluded with demands met on 5th August , if further protests happen we can later state it ongoing but as of now no source claims it as ongoing, even the source you gave is from 5th August, the current version is ok, if further protests erupt we can see but protests related to "one point movement" are over now since demand has been met. If further protests erupt we can include later or even they might need own article but for now the current duration is ok with sources stating one point demand has been met. Dilbaggg (talk) 07:00, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

We need to stop this 3-word war

india was the biggest ally of hasina, period. but in the context of the article/the specific text, these three words her biggest ally may not be necessary here: "At 2:30 p.m. BST (08:30 GMT), Sheikh Hasina resigned and fled with her sister to India, her biggest ally." i don't have a strong feeling about this but some people may feel like this is a reflection of anti-india sentiment. Come on folks let's stop this "3-word war". let's reach a consensus and move on. cheers! Wrzedn (talk) 05:10, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Well its not important to write that. But I believe we can write it if we find reliable sources that can explain her relation with Indian government and its connection with her arrival to India. Mehedi Abedin 06:01, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

I agree with Mehedi Abedin. Since there is a source to support it, there is no harm in mentioning this as it explains her connection to India. 72.83.26.176 (talk) 06:49, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Agree with Mehedi Abedin. Wiki N Islam (talk) 09:14, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't think it is Due in lead, but it's fine elsewhere. Borgenland (talk) 09:01, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

I think it should stay. If I look deeper into this story, especially in the last few months leading to this event, Hasina's ties with India seems really important. There was even a movement to boycott Indian products this year in Bangladesh because of India's support to Hasina and its interference in Bangladesh's internal politics. Clearly suggests this was also part of the grievances that triggered this uprising. Nomian (talk) 22:51, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Time

Need to clarify: does Bangladesh use 12h or 24h format? Borgenland (talk) 11:55, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

i think it depends on the context: everyday people use 12:00 hour format but i think aviation industry, defence forces use 24:00 hour one. Wrzedn (talk) 15:52, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

What do the television channels there use? Borgenland (talk) 16:04, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

i think 12 hour, not sure though. in the news, they speak like "its 8:00 pm in the evening". Wrzedn (talk) 16:08, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Bangladesh use 12 hour format. Which is separate by Night and Day format. ApurboWiki2024 (talk) 15:56, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Mention of violent attacks on Hindus

Atleast it should be mentioned atleast in 3-4 words somewhere in corner. Loveforwiki (talk) 06:58, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Bangladesh Army as belligerent

Should Bangladesh Army be listed as a belligerent? Current they are listed as one of the Bangladesh government parties but it is also Army which made Sheikh Hasina to resign. 72.83.26.176 (talk) 08:09, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Request for protection

Reason: Vandalism from both sides particularly IP addresses, whether there was attack against police or minorities. While in reality, it was both. Bruno pnm ars (talk) 10:29, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Have you tried raising this at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection? Borgenland (talk) 12:56, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, i did. But it was in the early stage of the movement, so no protection was given at that time. Bruno pnm ars (talk) 16:21, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

I think it's best if you try there again if you want a quicker response. Borgenland (talk) 16:43, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Reuters: Sheikh Hasina did NOT resign

Source: https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/bangladeshs-hasina-did-not-resign-before-fleeing-delhi-says-son-adviser-2024-08-09/ 98.45.134.246 (talk) 23:10, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

How shall we proceed? It seems a lot of news articles earlier in the week reported that Sheikh Hasina had resigned. Now it is coming out that she in fact did not resign. Does that have implications for a Constitutional Crisis? 98.45.134.246 (talk) 23:11, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Resignation of Sheikh Hasina

Guys, according to this discussion, the Resignation of Sheikh Hasina is notable enough to have an article. But as the sections on the article taken directly from Non-cooperation movement (2024) without using extensive sources that can explain everything about the topic, it became a redirect now. If anyone can expand the resignation section using sources based on primarily the resignation then it can be a separate article. And we should try it. Mehedi Abedin 05:56, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Here are some sources that will help you to expand the resignation section and that would led us to create it a separate article:

Here I got sources directly talk about the resignation of Sheikh Hasina:

• Bangladesh PM Sheikh Hasina resigns and flees country as protesters storm palace
• Bangladeshi PM Sheikh Hasina resigns as widening unrest sees protesters storm her official residence
• Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina resigns and flees country
• Timeline: Events leading up to Bangladesh PM Sheikh Hasina’s resignation

Mehedi Abedin 05:58, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

@Wiki N Islam Do you want to start expanding it? I am busy for several reasons. Mehedi Abedin 06:04, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

It will make this too complicated. This article is also not long enough. I support continuing this article's Outcome section. This will also make this article to develop. Wiki N Islam (talk) 09:19, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

We could do a request. Image2012 (talk) 09:35, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Hey guys, Reuters is now reporting that Sheikh Hasina did NOT resign. I opened a new topic below.

Here's the source: https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/bangladeshs-hasina-did-not-resign-before-fleeing-delhi-says-son-adviser-2024-08-09/ 98.45.134.246 (talk) 23:12, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 August 2024

Indian media outlets started spreading propaganda news and hailing Sheikh Hasina as a hero. (India, which is the biggest ally of Sheikh Hasina, didn't play a responsible role during this turbulent situation in Bangladesh. Sheikh Hasina is considered Delhi's puppet government. India provided unequivocal support for Sheikh Hasina during the last three staged elections.)

Social media and other news sources were full of Indian propaganda news, claiming major attacks on minorities. Independent fact-checkers debunked most of the claims [1] [2][3]. Yes, there were some attacks on Hindus (not just Hindus but on all religions). In most cases, the victims were strongly affiliated with Sheikh Hasina and her autocratic rule. R.ali.ashik (talk) 06:46, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. SerChevalerie (talk) 08:34, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Translation

Hi folks who understand Bangla, “রক্তের দাগ শুকায় নাই” is translated as “The stain of blood didn’t dry” in the article. But given the context, it doesn’t feel right to me--specifically, the didn't part. Should it be “The stain of blood hasn’t dried” OR more concisely “The bloodstain hasn’t dried [yet]”? Can any native Bangla speaker suggest what’s the most appropriate translation? Cheers! Wrzedn (talk) 05:46, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

okay, no one answered, so assuming no native bangla speakers has seen this. just digged a bit deeper and looks like the line “রক্তের দাগ শুকায় নাই” was inspired by Mujib's 7th March speech in 1971. The translation seems to be "The marks of bloods have not yet dried" according to Nur, S., 2019. The struggle this time is the struggle for our independence: A critical discourse analysis of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s historic 7th March speech. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 10(2), pp.107-120. Wrzedn (talk) 16:40, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

I changed the translation. Mehedi Abedin 01:55, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

thanks, Mehedi! now it feels right. Wrzedn (talk) 01:58, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

just fyi: I've changed the word "bloods" to "blood" as it is a mass noun that you can't really count and is always singular. Wrzedn (talk) 02:05, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Using an unreliable source "Daily Kalbela"

Daily Kalbela is not a reliable media outlet. None of the credible international media have published this so-called 'fake Hindu gathering report.' However, this source has been used in the 'Violence against Hindus' section, where almost all other sources in this section are from international media. Just because a media outlet has wide circulation in Bangladesh doesn’t mean it is reliable. Similarly, Indian media are widely seen and read in India, but that doesn’t automatically make them reliable. King Ayan Das (talk) 20:47, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. This is not a reliable source, and Bangladeshi sources, especially those filled with either justification or denial of violence, should not be included unless that material is also covered by international, 'reliable' sources. This source has zero credibility and is in no position to make such unique claims DangalOh (talk) 21:04, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Daily Kalbela is a reliable source and referenced by several other media outlets, their journalists are awarded for their journalistic works [1]. On the other hand, Indian media is frequently involved in spreading misinformation, especially regarding this particular event, rendering them unreliable. Don't mix up the two. Za-ari-masen (talk) 21:30, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Did I mention Indian media anywhere? Why do you guys always have to insert India into everything? I'm not going to get into comparisons between the two countries or how they function. Any Bangladeshi award to any Bangladeshi outlet means nothing here. Any publication from a country undergoing such radical changes needs to be scrutinized first before scrutinizing or blatantly criticising publications from other countries. Anyway, this is a discussion. I have provided my views and rationale. You are not going to change it.You have also made your stand clear and gave your reasoning. Whatever the community decides after discussion. DangalOh (talk) 21:47, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Can you provide any neutral, reliable international source that confirms Daily Kalbela is a credible outlet, referenced by other reputable media, and that its journalists have been awarded for their work? Even Bangladesh Sangbad Sangstha has not gained international recognition, so why should Daily Kalbela be considered reliable? King Ayan Das (talk) 21:59, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Can you show any source that says Kalbela or any other Bangladeshi media outlet is spreading misinformation regarding these events? If not, then these are only your personal opinions which you are trying to project to push your POV. Za-ari-masen (talk) 22:07, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

What kind of logic is this? Do you have any sources that claim Bangladeshi publications never spread misinformation? The onus is on you to prove the reliability of the source you provided for the unique claim not supported by any other reliable or non reliable source. As mentioned by the previous user, the source is neither notable nor reliable, especially in this special scenario and they also asked you to prove its reliability, which you have avoided. DangalOh (talk) 22:21, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Who added the line about the so-called 'fake Hindu gathering' in the 'Violence against Hindus' section using this unreliable "Daily Kalbela" source, you or me? It’s your responsibility to provide proof that this source is internationally recognized, like Reuters, NYTimes, etc. King Ayan Das (talk) 22:23, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

I have no responsibility to address prejudiced personal opinions. We are avoiding Indian sources because there are several reports on their involvement with spreading misinformation regarding these events. If you show any reliable source that says Daily Kalbela is spreading misinformation, I will be glad to remove it. Za-ari-masen (talk) 22:30, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

"So you’re confirming that there are no credible, reliable, internationally recognized sources verifying the so-called 'fake Hindu gathering,' except for this unreliable Bangladeshi source. Right? Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), meaning it should fairly and proportionately represent all significant views published by reliable sources on a topic. In that case, you cannot prove that 'Daily Kalbela' is a reliable source." King Ayan Das (talk) 22:51, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

We have sources listed in Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources which reported the protest. Any claim to falsify it should also atleast come from the sources in that list. No non notable source can be used without establishing reliablity. DangalOh (talk) 23:00, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Such assertions are totally out of context per WP:RSPMISSING. If you want to settle things once and for all I suggest filing a case at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard before making rash edits based on POV and getting kicked out for edit-warring in the process. This goes for both sides. Borgenland (talk) 23:06, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok i guess that assertion was wrong from my side. I rarely edit so edit war is out of question. @King Ayan Das Reliable sources/noticeboard is where you might find success. @Borgenland But i do feel a special consideration be given to publications of countries affected by the events. And i know its for both sides but would like to know what you think? DangalOh (talk) 23:17, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

As an editor involved in covering conflicts no one gives a damn about, one does not wait for the WP:BUREAUCRACY assumption of waiting for the rest of the world to hear about things unless in cases of WP:FRINGE, the latter of which has not been seen yet. However, I also understand the other's predicament given that it in the context of this event, it happens that Indian media has been called out in reports by multiple RS for misinformation so the burden is higher on them rather than in Bangladesh-based sources. Borgenland (talk) 23:26, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

As per Reporters Without Borders' latest 2024 press freedom index Bangladesh scored just 27.64 and ranked at 165 out of 180 countries Reporters Without Borders report| , even worse than Pakistan , India and Russia. And changing the government does not mean that Bangladeshi media are automatically free and reliable over night . As this reports suggest that any of South Asian media are not so reliable. It's not just about Indian media vs. Bangladeshi media King Ayan Das (talk) 05:42, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately your report cannot be found. And Wikipedia does not operate on casting general aspersions on nationalities, which is why WP:RPS operates on case-to-case basis. Borgenland (talk) 14:26, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Source:"https://rsf.org/en/index" you can search "2024 World Press Freedom Index" in internet and confirm it . King Ayan Das (talk) 15:16, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

@King Ayan Das Its useless to debate them. If reliabilty is not proven or established, remove the fringe claim or report it. I am not going to waste my energy anymore on illogical replies. You may continue if you want. DangalOh (talk) 22:40, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

I have already proved that Daily Kalbela is a reliable source, it's just that you don't want to listen. Za-ari-masen (talk) 22:57, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Is 'Bangladesh Sangbad Sangstha' an internationally recognized institution? King Ayan Das (talk) 23:03, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Well looks like there are contradictory information about this topic, Kaler Kantho, a reliable source, reports that Hindus in Lalmonirhat arrived near border and there is no mention of any AL leader spreading rumour to attract them. Prothom Alo, another reliable source, reports about press conference after the incident by Border Guard Bangladesh (BGB), but they don't report about the involvement of AL leader. But Naya Diganta reports the incident. Naya Diganta reports that an AL leader spread rumors that "Indian leaders will come to the border and talk to Hindus, be videoed in international and Indian media and arrange for them to be taken to India."

It is possible that some AL leader really tried to call hindus to border by spreading rumors, but that does not mean that attack on them didn’t happen. Prothom Alo and Kaler Kantho reports that "...Miscreants are attacking, vandalizing, looting and setting fire to the homes of minorities every day. And because of that, thousands of minorities tried to cross the border to India on Friday...". But also official statement of BGB says that news about attack on hindus in Lalmonirhat is rumour.

We can come to the conclusion from these sources that Hindus in Lalmonirhat went to borders because of attacks on hindus happened in many areas of Bangladesh, but not in Lalmonirhat. The rumour incident was probably true as multiple source reported it but also it is clear from sources that hindus in Lalmonirhat wanted to cross border because of the fear of attack (because attacks happened in many areas) and the rumour both. We should edit the article accordingly. Mehedi Abedin 02:19, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

SUPPORT. thanks, @Mehedi, for a well-balanced argument. Wrzedn (talk) 03:34, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

• From what I see there are three citations, including one from Jugantor, added to verify the incident so it doesn't look like a fringe fake story as King Ayan Das is claiming. Adding too many details on this incident would also be WP:UNDUE. Of course, if any fact-checking report debunks this incident, it should be removed immediately, or at least updated with the fact-check. I think the present revision looks quite balanced, it mentions both that Hindus trying to flee to India and an AL leader spreading rumors, without either refuting or endorsing each other. Nomian (talk) 04:03, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

  sorry, @Nomian, i dont think the current version is clear and balanced. what i see in the current version is not a balanced presentation of the events as @Mehedi described. a reader would interpret the events as if all the people (700-800 mentioned in the first sentence) went to the border only because of the alleged rumours. i think the events in Lalmonirhat was a separate one (that's a different district than Thakurgaon, right?) where the people attempted to flee because of 1) rumours and 2) fear of attack that were happening all over the country. more clarity is needed. Wrzedn (talk) 04:50, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

  As per the current revision, the rumored gathering of Hindus was allegedly dispersed by the BGB and police. However, even in the Jugantor report, is there any confirmation or official statement from the Border Guard Bangladesh or Bangladesh Police regarding this alleged conspiracy? No, there isn’t—so how is this not a fringe fake story? Is there any proof or screenshot of this so-called false Facebook status or message in their report, as Jugantor claims? And if this isn’t a fringe fake story, then why hasn't a single non-Bangladeshi source (even disregarding reliability) covered it? Why hasn't this incident been officially confirmed by government officials, the Border Guard Bangladesh, or the Bangladesh Police, especially now that an interim government is in place? At the very least, Reuters and The Independent published multiple reports on violence against Hindus after August 5th. If this isn’t a fringe fake story, why didn’t they cover this important incident if it really happened as claimed? King Ayan Das (talk) 05:16, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Hilarious logic! There are lots of crime reports around the world which are only reported by local media, you are saying they are all fake news? Za-ari-masen (talk) 14:31, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

 Comment: This discussion isn’t giving us any result. I suggest users to apply for WP:RFC if this dispute continues. Mehedi Abedin 07:30, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

I think we have quite a balanced paragraph now. It would have been better if we could confirm where these incidents happened though:

1. In [where; the article mentions Thakurgaon.] Around 700-800 Hindus attempted to flee to India after their houses and businesses were attacked and looted. However, they were turned back by both countries' border guards.

2. In [where; it could be across all borders] Indian Border Security Force (BSF) arrested nearly a dozen Bangladeshis who were trying to cross the border to escape the violence and political unrest. Wrzedn (talk) 16:06, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

"Monsoon Revolution" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Monsoon Revolution has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 13 § Monsoon Revolution until a consensus is reached. Mehedi Abedin 04:49, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Protests against the targetted violence in Bangladesh

There have been numerous protests against targetted violence against religious and racial minorities in Bangladesh. With multiple WP:RS reporting the same and UNGA secretary's statements along with US House of Congress member's statemetns, I believe that these need to be recorded inside the violence against hindus subsection. Regarding WP:UNDUE, the viewpoint is not extremely small or minority as it has been expressed by multiple organizations including the UN. With multiple WP:RS covering it and big trustable organizations and individuals including US Congressmen and UN secretary's expressing their concerns, I think it belongs in this article, if not a separate article on the violence. Inviting counter-viewpoints for discussion. Xoocit (talk) 08:37, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

A separate article relating to anti-Hindu violence after Hasina's fall is already created, but is written like an essay and has AI-generated content it seems. It needs to be completely deleted and started from scratch. I've started that. I think the previous text I had put here regarding anti-Hindu violence can go there. For that topic especially, Indian media may not be reliable so I would go with Bangladeshi or international news sources. C1MM (talk) 16:51, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Should we use Indian sources?

Lot's of people are complaining on social media that Indian mainstream media is trying to spread propaganda against the protests on behalf of Hasina and Awami League. These Indian sources are clearly biased and unreliable. 72.83.26.176 (talk) 21:57, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi!
Maybe we can use the Indian sources but not the ones that are biased and unreliable. Only reliable sources can be chosen for use.
Thank you!
By Piruty Pipaty (talk) 22:58, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by "Indian Sources" - this is disrespectful and has a racist connotation. If any source is authentic and reliable, no matter from which country it is coming from, it's worthy using as a reference. Cheers! Wrzedn (talk) 01:05, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

There is WP:RS for a guide. Better to attribute if these sources also got their cue from wire agencies. Borgenland (talk) 01:48, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Best option would be — if you think the source is dubious or someone else might call it dubious, and if you are reverted for adding such a source, better post it here and let the community scrutinize it. If you reach a consensus to add it to the article, then add the source. Nomian (talk) 02:23, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

I think this was because of several India-based outlets being tagged as dubious at the very least on WP:RSP. Borgenland (talk) 02:50, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

I understand your concern. It’s important to ensure that language used in articles is respectful and unbiased. Referring to sources by their nationality can sometimes unintentionally imply bias or discrimination.

If you are writing or editing an article, you might consider using terms like “reliable sources” or “credible sources” instead of specifying the nationality. This way, the focus remains on the reliability and credibility of the information, rather than its origin. Wrzedn (talk) 03:11, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

And which media outlets, I wonder, have taken it upon themselves to decide what constitutes reliability, Al Jazeera? Indian media has a better grasp on the situation because, first, it's their neighboring country; second, they understand the language and culture; third, many Bangladeshi Hindus are reaching out directly to Indian news outlets; and fourth, they have access to key information, especially given that the Prime Minister of Bangladesh is currently in India. So perhaps it's time to reconsider any underlying biases. 2409:40E1:B:AA0A:203E:40FF:FE43:BC3 (talk) 21:55, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Some Indian sources are biased true. We should check out the right info before adding any source. Wiki N Islam (talk) 04:23, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Do we consider the Hindu as a biased source? The "Violence against minorities" sub-section has been changed because some of the info were based on that newspaper. Wrzedn (talk) 06:13, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

See the list again. I think another consideration was also placed at WP:NEWSORGINDIA below the WP:RSPSOURCES list. Borgenland (talk) 13:55, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

There is no logic to suggest we cannot use Indian sources, even when many are listed as reliable, because they are inherently biased due to being Indian. It's like saying we can't use any Muslim sources for India-related pages because they are inherently biased. This is extremely inappropriate and racist. DangalOh (talk) 12:06, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

@Borgenland @Wrzedn @TrangaBellam Do you agree with the recent revert by@Nomian also removing the bbc source. Wasnt a user recently blocked for suggesting such a theme? Are all indian media so called "godi media" including the hindu, wire, scroll, quint etc.? How is this assumption not racist? DangalOh (talk) 12:38, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Calling someone racist is a blatant personal attack, I hope you would refrain from such baseless allegations. The existing geopolitics in the region pertains that sources from Indian media cannot be trusted on the issue of protests against Hasina government since India is her biggest ally and India media itself is largely under the influence of Indian government. Nomian (talk) 12:44, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

You are implying that ALL Indian sources are biased and government-controlled irrespective of their political leaning? Was Bangladesh India's ally, or was Hasina's government India's ally? If anything, there is a personal assumption of yours that the new government won't be India-friendly, or do you know something we don't know yet? Anyways, I did not call you racist. I find the suggestion to be racist and biased, whoever suggests it. The feeling was shared by other users too, if you bother to read the entire conversation. And that is exactly why I have commented on the talk page. If others are fine with this suggestion, then it's ok. Don't worry, I am not going to start an edit war. DangalOh (talk) 12:53, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

@DangalOh So do we consider best trustworthy sources are Al Jazeera ??? Loveforwiki (talk) 05:27, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Please try taking a course in logic and check your bias. It's showing. 2409:40E1:B:AA0A:203E:40FF:FE43:BC3 (talk) 21:58, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Replying to ping: Of the purged sources, I won't use India Today and The Print; The Hindu is fine. And, BBC is Indian media? TrangaBellam (talk) 12:53, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Exactly. Even BBC was removed. DangalOh (talk) 12:54, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

I have been observing this for a while as I edit this article: there seems to be some kind of anti-India sentiment in place. It’s disheartening that people editing a Wikipedia article are not objective, cannot maintain impartiality, and are largely driven by emotion. As I’ve mentioned before, any source, regardless of the country it originates from, is worth mentioning if the news or information comes from a reputable source. For instance, if you’re a Trump supporter, you can’t just ignore BBC or CNN because they lean a bit towards the Democrats. Similarly, you can’t ignore Fox News because it often promotes a right-wing agenda.

If you visit Media Bias Fact Check (link here: mediabiasfactcheck.com, you can easily determine the credibility of various sources. It’s quite straightforward. For instance, ‘The Hindu’ is considered mostly factual and holds high credibility. I truly don’t understand the issue with using ‘The Hindu’ or ‘BBC’ as sources (other than that the info don’t align with my personal narrative or sentiment). It's silly and extremely unprofessional. Cheers! Wrzedn (talk) 13:18, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

I mean, the example of Fox News is incorrect here, as Wikipedia lists it as outright unreliable. Let's not get into why, as that's another debate. The problem here is stating that all sources from a particular country, including those listed as perfectly reliable, are unreliable based on personal assumptions and opinions. Anti-India sentiment is nothing new. However, this confident removal of content, citing that the entire country is biased, is definitely new and shocking. Trangabellam has suggested some measures. What do you think @Wrzedn? We can remove the sources not listed in Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources and keep sources such as The hindu (and ofcourse reinstate BBC). Or shuould we wait for more inputs? @Kautilya3, @Borgenland, @User4edits your inputs would be invaluable here. DangalOh (talk) 13:47, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

The reference to Fox News was merely an example, emphasizing the importance of exploring all sources and retaining the reliable ones. Anyway, I'd support an "undo" of text based on The Hindu and BBC (and other reliable news outlets). And let's wait for @Kautilya3, @Borgenland, @User4edits. Cheers! Wrzedn (talk) 14:53, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

No objections to the Hindu and the BBC. Also wondering why the UCA report was removed in the Ahmadiyya section. Borgenland (talk) 14:57, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

I think someone just slashed everything out (including Ahmadiyya section) without being responsible and objective. Wrzedn (talk) 15:04, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes. The reason given was "as per talk page." I did reinstate it with additional sources (I may have replaced the source previously provided because questions were being raised, though I don't know why), but someone reverted everything again, including one BBC source I provided for the previous statement. I don't want an edit war with motivated people full of hatred in their heart so i am leaving. If we reach a consensus here, please reinstate it. Thanks. DangalOh (talk) 15:14, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Warning everyone in advance that a user has been inserting WP:FRINGE edits containing references about a fictitious Nobel laureate in Wikivoice into Sheikh Hasina and 2024 Bangladesh quota reform movement in what looks to be a classic case of WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Borgenland (talk) 18:02, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

• Indian media is very visibly spreading misinformation regarding Bangladesh and it is now well reported. Za-ari-masen (talk) 17:19, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

  I’d like to clarify that I’m not seeking an argument here, as it appears to be counterproductive. I’ve come across numerous reports from credible sources about attacks and vandalism against the Hindu minority aftetr the recent events in Bangladesh. Therefore, the source you’re citing, which states, “Since Tuesday, we have seen them guarding the temples,” and suggests that there have been no attacks on the Hindu community or vandalism of temples, may not be entirely accurate. I understand that the minority population is currently under immense pressure and may not disclose the truth due to fear of exacerbating the situation. If that’s the case, it’s truly unfortunate. Please note that my opinions are based on the facts I read; I don’t have any affiliations with Bangladesh or India, and I strive to maintain a neutral perspective. Wrzedn (talk) 04:39, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

  @Wrzden Do you think this theme of collective "denial and whitewashing" is new or localized to Bangladesh? Look around the world and at history. And you are correct, there's no point arguing. I asked you all to counter it with sources (including BBC) which I provided (i refused to do it cause i was attacked two times). You all chose to ignore or wait for some savior (not particularly directed towards you personally). And now, as per new edits, madrasa students are protecting temples and churches anyway (from whom?). Leave it. Just be very alert in your own country. Protect your own country. These countries are lost causes anyway. Minorities living there deserved this. You don't live in a Muslim-majority country unless it has oil and a demand for cheap labor in order to tolerate you. And even then, you would be stupid to ever think about equal rights or even any respect. Staying alive becomes the lifelong objective. I don't know much about Hasina's fascism, but she was the only shield protecting minorities in Bangladesh. That's actually fascism — not letting the majority do what it wants to do. Now there is democratic frontsliding. Win Win for everyone. DangalOh (talk) 07:50, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

  You’re being somewhat emotional and personal, but that’s perhaps understandable, and I can see why you might be frustrated. I don’t know much about Hasina, but from what I’ve read, she seems to check all the boxes of a fascist autocrat. I don’t have enough knowledge to discuss how Hasina was related to the minority population in Bangladesh, so I won’t go down that route. However, it’s clear from what I’ve read that there have been numerous attacks on minority groups, particularly Hindus, following her departure. These attacks are quite evident, but it seems that the majority of the editors on this article are interested in downplaying them. I think I understand the reason, but I’m afraid there’s not much you and I can do about it due to the prevailing mob mentality/syndicate here. If someone doesn’t want to face the reality, let them be. It’s their choice. Wrzedn (talk) 12:35, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

  https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/07/world/asia/bangladesh-politics-unrest.html?auth=login-google1tap&login=google1tap

  https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/hindus-bangladesh-try-flee-india-amid-violence-2024-08-08/ DangalOh (talk) 16:36, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

King Ayan Das edits

King Ayan Das is repeatedly adding POV with poor prose and source falsifications to the article. It looks like he is only interested in inflating the "Violence against Hindus" section. Can you please discuss your edits here before making the changes? You are surely not improving the article. Za-ari-masen (talk) 13:48, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

• Pinging other editors Nomian, Borgenland, Wiki N Islam, Mehedi Abedin. Za-ari-masen (talk) 13:50, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

  I have got to say that said user has been making POV arguments and using the talk page as a WP:BATTLEGROUND. Furthermore I find it incredulous that said user denounces Al Jazeera, which has a mostly clean rating on WP:RPS on charges of bias but at the same time considers Anadolu Agency as a reliable , neutral and internationally recognized source despite it having a lower rating on the same scale. Nor has their insistence that South Asian countries and nearby regions suffer from an abominable press freedom record and should be avoided prevent them from using sources from such countries when convenient. Said user should also be checked for possible WP:3RR. Borgenland (talk) 13:57, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

  I never use any Indian source (except one) and as per current edit Anadolu Agency source King Ayan Das (talk) 14:03, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

All edits are based on reliable , neutral and internationally recognized sources with proper edit summary King Ayan Das (talk) 13:50, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

• I have noticed this before. Not just that, they are also introducing different format errors and leaving it without fixing. Nomian (talk) 13:53, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

  which edits are ? King Ayan Das (talk) 13:58, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Your latest edit for instance. Nomian (talk) 13:59, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

All edits are as per source . please clarify particularly which edit King Ayan Das (talk) 14:01, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

• From what I observe, out of the 232 people killed in the violence in the post-Hasina period, 2 were Hindus. Still, we have a disproportionately large section on the violence against Hindus which itself is clearly WP:UNDUE. It appears that Indian media is covering this event with a focus on the Hindus so I can understand where the sentiments are coming from. But we need to recognize that this whole event is much bigger than just the violence, and certainly, the violence against Hindus. There are lots of reports available on Hasina's resignation but nobody seem to be interested in expanding that. The background can also include much more details on the existing grievances that led to the protests. Let's not get fixated into just one particular side rather look at things holistically. Nomian (talk) 14:25, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

  I would like to see a WP:RS source about your claims that only 2 out of the 232 were Hindus. From what I can look up, multiple WP:RS sources, there have been more than 200 attacks on minorities since the fall of the government, I would doubt that only 2 of them resulted in deaths. Xoocit (talk) 06:58, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Cross-wiki

Need help fixing the 2024 in Bangladesh incumbents tables per the results of this movement. Borgenland (talk) 08:00, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Section titles totally biased against certain viewpoints.

"misinformation by Indian media"? Such shameful choice of words! It ought to be framed as "alleged misinformation by Indian media" assuming it warrants a dedicated section at all. However, I harbor no illusions that Wikipedia will maintain neutrality on such contentious matters. Still, I hold onto a glimmer of hope. 2409:40E1:B:AA0A:203E:40FF:FE43:BC3 (talk) 21:46, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

This is now a verified claim reported by multiple sources so not really "alleged". Za-ari-masen (talk) 03:59, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

The statement that "Indian media is spreading false information" is problematic for several reasons. First, it overgeneralizes by suggesting that the entire Indian media is engaged in misinformation, which ignores the diversity within Indian media. Some outlets may indeed be spreading inaccurate information, but it's misleading to imply that this applies to all media sources in the country.

Additionally, the chaotic nature of situations involving communal and political violence makes it challenging to definitively label information as true or false. In such contexts, different narratives emerge based on varying perspectives, biases, and the limited availability of verifiable facts. Deciding what is true or false in these circumstances isn't straightforward, and claiming that the Indian media as a whole is spreading false information oversimplifies the complexity of the issue.

Lastly, the choice of wording plays a significant role in shaping perceptions. Saying "Indian media is spreading false information" implies a collective intent and uniformity that doesn't exist. It would be more accurate and neutral to specify "some outlets of Indian media," which acknowledges the presence of misinformation without unfairly maligning the entire media landscape. 2409:40E1:E:658B:D007:EEFF:FEA1:867F (talk) 19:20, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Information from Indian media

There is a section on the article which says that several Indian media spread disinformation about the situation in Bangladesh, however upon a closer inspection on the sources used, none of the sources mention Indian media houses but rather Twitter accounts which are based in India or tweet on Indian topics, I don't think these few accounts can be classified as "Indian media" as per the standard practice on wiki. Inviting a discussion on this. Xoocit (talk) 20:18, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

So, who exactly appointed these so-called "journalists" as the ultimate judges of truth about the entire Indian media? It's fascinating how they can casually imply that all of India's media is peddling lies. How is this generic implication still be perceived as anything close to neutrality? Quite the feat of objective observation, don't you think? 2409:40E1:E:658B:D007:EEFF:FEA1:867F (talk) 19:12, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Let me add this. The claim that "Indian media is spreading false information" is biased because it indiscriminately accuses the entire media landscape in India of misinformation. This approach overlooks the diversity and range of media outlets in the country, which vary in terms of credibility, perspective, and accuracy. By making a sweeping generalization, the claim unfairly tarnishes all media sources with the same brush, suggesting a uniformity that does not exist.

Additionally, such a claim can inadvertently lend itself to a conspiracy-like tone, implying that there is a coordinated effort or widespread intent among Indian media to mislead the public. This notion of a deliberate, overarching strategy among all media outlets creates a sense of suspicion and distrust without concrete evidence to support it.

A more neutral way to frame the issue would be to acknowledge that some media outlets may be spreading allegedly false information. This approach avoids broad generalizations and focuses on specific instances, allowing for a more balanced discussion that considers the diversity of perspectives and the complexity of verifying information in chaotic situations. For example, one might say, "Certain outlets within the Indian media have been reported to spread information that some claim is false," which maintains neutrality and accuracy while addressing the issue. 2409:40E1:E:658B:D007:EEFF:FEA1:867F (talk) 19:25, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 August 2024

Death - Please edit from at least 172 to at least 300

Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/bangladeshi-protesters-attack-supporters-ex-premier-hasina-rcna166858 Gibranbd (talk) 16:42, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

•  Partly done: - the source seems to be combining this with the 2024 Bangladesh quota reform movement for its death toll (see linked article: "where at least 300 people have been killed in recent weeks"). A new report from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights has been published today with a higher estimate of 650 total (400 for quote reform, 250 for non cooperation) which I have cited and added. MSG17 (talk) 21:59, 16 August 2024 (UTC)