Talk:Non-cooperation movement (2024)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

@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)