Talk:Shah Ahmad Shafi/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Shah Ahmad Shafi. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Page issues
1. 40 millions people was not gathered in the long march. However, if any one can give authentic source, this part can be edited again. For your kind information, 40 millions means 25% of Bangladeshi! 2. Hartal was called by 27 organizations, not by any atheist group. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.182.3 (talk) 09:52, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Edit request on 10 April 2013
 | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please delete the first paragraph except "Ahmad Shafi, is the present rector of Al-Jamiatul Ahlia Darul Ulum Moinul Islam Hathazari, Chittagong, Bangladesh.". Because these information are not right at all. The source you use to collect information is not the valid one since it is a biased news agency. 103.11.138.10 (talk) 04:22, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Then show me a source which says it's wrong. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:56, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Edit request on 16 April 2013
| | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"He is also alleged to collaborate with Pakistan army in Bangladesh liberation war." false news by bdnews24 " on 6th April 2013 in Dhaka a long march rally was gathered for punishment of bloggers. During that gathering they beat and harassed female journalist for being a female and journalist in same time.[5]" news is not properly true. Armanctg (talk) 14:09, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Not done: please make your request in a "change X to Y" format. —KuyaBriBriTalk 21:01, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Clear POV pushing within the article
Recently, I removed some rather clear instances of POV pushing within the article which clearly conflict with the Wikipedia:Neutral point of view policy. Specifically:
- The subject's political group was described as fundamentalist, which appears to conflict with WP:IMPARTIAL. It has been changed to "allegedly fundamentalist" because the subject and group themselves don't seem to openly describe themselves as such; just their opponents.
- The subject's views on women were described as primitive, which is such a clear violation of WP:SUBJECTIVE that an explanation really isn't necessary. The current and neutral version now describes the subjects views as as "what opponents view as his regressive views on women."
Given that this is one of the fundamental policies on Wikipedia and is not up for negotiation, there shouldn't be any controversy over this. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:30, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:07, 18 February 2020 (UTC)