Talk:Bangladesh Liberation War

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bangladesh Liberation War article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11: 3 months

Bangladesh Liberation War received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on 11 dates. [show]

December 16, 2005, March 26, 2007, December 16, 2007, March 26, 2008, March 26, 2009, December 16, 2009, March 26, 2010, March 26, 2018, March 26, 2021, December 16, 2021, and December 16, 2022

Military history: Asian / South Asia / Cold War

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	South Asian military history task force
	Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989)

History Mid‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Bangladesh Top‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bangladesh, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bangladesh on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BangladeshWikipedia:WikiProject BangladeshTemplate:WikiProject BangladeshBangladesh

Top

This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

The article falls into the work area of the History workgroup of WikiProject Bangladesh

WikiProject Bangladesh To-do list:

Add more images to Bangladesh Liberation War and related pages
Clean up Climate change in Bangladesh, it needs a lot of work
Clean up History of Bangladesh after independence, it needs NPOV
Improve Bangladesh back to FA as it was demoted (see discussion)
Improve Bengali language back to FA as it was demoted (see discussion)
Improve Bengalis and related pages
Take a look at the requested articles.
Make a MRT line 3 article.
Extend, add an infobox and a map of New Eskaton to New Eskaton.

Pakistan Mid‑importance

	Pakistan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

India: West Bengal High‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject West Bengal (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article was last assessed in March 2024.

Bengal (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bengal, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.BengalWikipedia:WikiProject BengalTemplate:WikiProject BengalBengal

Cold War Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cold War, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Cold War on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Cold WarWikipedia:WikiProject Cold WarTemplate:WikiProject Cold WarCold War
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must be logged-in to an extended confirmed account (granted automatically to accounts with 500 edits and an age of 30 days)

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This article is written in Bangladeshi English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analyse, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Semi-protected edit request on 12 December 2019

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Support Box

Why is the UK listed? The Box should only be kept with the 3 powers, Soviets, US and Chinese. The UK i understand were selling weapons to both India and Pakistan, it did not support a party against another, certainly not Pakistan against its own insurgency either. I don't think mere sale of weapons was this particular article's rule precedent policy for listing a country in the support by section. RevolutionaryPatriot (talk) 19:25, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@RevolutionaryPatriot Oh. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 12:00, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Air supremacy-Fix sentence structure

This is an overly complex sentence that incorrectly states that Pakistan achieved air supremacy before surrender: "The subsequent Indo-Pakistani War involved fighting on two fronts; with air supremacy achieved in the eastern theatre, and the rapid advance of the Allied Forces of Mukti Bahini and the Indian military, Pakistan surrendered in Dhaka on 16 December 1971, in what remains to date the largest surrender of armed personnel since the Second World War."

Minimal change suggestion: "The subsequent Indo-Pakistani War involved fighting on two fronts. With air supremacy achieved in the eastern theatre, the Allied Forces of Mukti Bahini and the Indian military rapidly advanced. Pakistan surrendered in Dhaka on 16 December 1971, in what remains to date the largest surrender of armed personnel since the Second World War." Dunnpm (talk) 12:35, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am nor sure it does, it does not say who didi, (I assume it was India, which needs to be clarified). Slatersteven (talk) 12:37, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source [19] should be deleted

[19]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Source [19] should be deleted. It's just a copy of an old version this very Wikipedia article. It also doesn't even back the sentence that is citing it.

Bitspectator ⛩️ 23:02, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks, Bitspectator, the high commission webpage is a copy of the lead of this article circa October 2019. --Worldbruce (talk) 03:36, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 2024

@Orientls, @Ratnahastin can you both please explain me where do my edits look controversial?? Is adding missing items controversial?? I just wanted to improve the infobox in light of Israel–Hamas War & Irish War of Independence and added the names of some missing leaders. Ahammed Saad (talk) 07:13, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Orientls, @Ratnahastin Ahammed Saad (talk) 07:14, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ahammed Saad: I haven't examined at the edits in question, but a common mistake is trying to cram too much information into the infobox, which defeats its purpose as a high level summary of the article. Template:Infobox military conflict/doc says the infobox shouldn't contain material not present in the article, which the current list of commanders already violates. It also says, "For wars, only prominent or notable leaders should be listed, with an upper limit of about seven per combatant column recommended. Ranks and position titles should be omitted." That's two more ways in which the current list deviates from convention. "Adding missing items" could be controversial if it makes the above violations even greater. See Help:Infobox for more information.

If you think your edits are in line with guidelines, the best way to gain consensus for them would be to break them into easy to understand groups of changes (like changes you want to make to the commanders section). For each batch, show the before and after versions side by side on this talk page, and explain why it's an improvement in terms of policies and guidelines. Comparisons with other articles can be drawn, but I recommend using only featured articles as examples, since there's no guarantee that any random article follows Wikipedia's rules any better than this article. --Worldbruce (talk) 13:14, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for discussing Ahammed Saad (talk) 13:51, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bihari casualties in Infobox?

Should we attempt to add Bihari casualties in the Infobox? BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 13:45, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. ਸਰਦਾਰਅਮਨਦੀਪਸਿੰਘ (talk) 11:11, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"The China"

A minor grammatical correction in the fourth paragraph of the introduction. There is no need for "the" before "China". 2001:4DD6:887:0:1988:B960:D1C3:58BA (talk) 15:01, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 December 2024 --- 17,000 Indian Soldiers Killed during 1971 War

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

We need to include that Indian Forces lost 17,000 Soldier during the 1971 War with Pakistan. This is very important edit as India lost more soldiers than it reported to the media. https://www.news18.com/world/india-now-supposedly-an-enemy-taslima-nasreen-slams-bangladeshs-shift-towards-pakistan-9147802.html 2607:FEA8:4FE5:6F00:8DD8:BC6F:9901:DC3A (talk) 12:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The AP (talk) 19:27, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is from reliable Indian News Agency News18.Com, are you saying Indian News Outlets are completely fake as I can point out multiple garbage resources on the following Wiki Article about 1971 War. Please confirm or I will escalate the issue. 2607:FEA8:4FE5:6F00:7984:14A8:D91C:C5C (talk) 20:36, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

News media is generally reliable for news reporting. In this case, News18.com is a reliable source for the statement that Taslima Nasreen wrote something on Facebook. So what? That doesn't mean that what Nasreen wrote is historically accurate. "Garbage resource" isn't really a term we use here, but for history, books written by historians and published by academic presses make far better sources. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:04, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, as Worldbruce pointed out - News18.com is a reliable source for stating the fact that Narseen wrote something on FaceBook - but that doesn't mean what Nasreen wrote is historically accurate. Additionaly I would like to know what you mean by [...] I will escalate the issue? The AP (talk) 21:02, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]