Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bengali Language Movement

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted 00:00, 16 July 2007.

Bengali Language Movement

edit

I submit to your attention this article, which has been extensively worked upon by Tarif Ezaz, Ragib and myself, to be promoted to featured status. On an important subject and event in Bangladeshi history, this article meets all featured article criteria. Thus, I request your support for its promotion. Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 19:36, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have wikilinked all dates, except - February 21 and February 22 are often repeated, so they are not wikilinked every time (only when accompanied by different years). Also, lone years should not be wikilinked. Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 00:31, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support Support: Well written article - meets the FA criteria.-Arman Aziz 01:14, 17 June 2007 (UTC); Position updated to strong support in response to commendable improvement of the article as part of FA drive.-Arman Aziz 00:20, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Much improved. Copy-edit required throughout. The first sentence is good, but the second isn't:
    • "Discontent against Pakistan's "Urdu-only" policy had led to mass agitations since 1948 and the movement reached its climax after police fired upon and killed student demonstrators on 21 February 1952." Nope, "Discontent with". "Had led"—can't have this tense unless you've already located the current time for the reader (the present in past, as it were—when are we looking back from? It's not 1952, either). Please consider using plain language "on, while, among, to", not "upon, whilst, amongst, in order to".
    • "East Pakistan (also East Bengal)"—are these two regions or just two names?
    • "living mainly in the East Pakistan"—remove "the".
    • "the policy was enshrined into law and reaffirmed by national leaders, including several Bengali politicians"—"enshrined IN law", but that's an ongoing state, so just "passed into law". What do you mean by "reaffirmed by national leaders"?

This is just a few sentences. Needs hours' of work to iron the whole thing out. Tony 05:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bengal was divided into East and West for couple of times. At present East Bengal have become Bangladesh and West Bengal is a province of India. However the name East Bengal was changed to East Pakistan in 1955. So as we can see most of the happenings of the Language movement have actually occured when the region was officially named as East Bengal. So it's ok to use the name -East Bengal with the things that happened before 1956. But in general, like at the introduction, East Pakistan would be more suitable. But anyway it's the same place. Tarif from Bangladesh 07:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS Linking full dates. Oh, and looking above I see a comment about linking dates. You know, I'm happy for them not to be linked, since WikiMedia has consistently FAILED to seperate the autoformatting and linking functions, despite a huge push for it by 75 of us in January without opposition. I don't care what the MOS says. Make them fix up this technical glitch. Tony 05:14, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Please, get a good copyeditor (like, User:Fowler&fowler) to run through this article. It reads pretty awkward with the high amount of information crammed into the article. It's a bad reading as opposed to the "brilliant prose" an FA requires. It also contains quite a large number of weasel words (like, "many believe", "some hold" etc. - well not exact examples, but you get the idea). I have a few other comments to make:
  • The UN thing should show up in within the first few sentences for an international audience. (may be replace UN with UNESCO to make it more accurate) Done
  • If possible include something about the importance of the movement in the scheme of world history, there should be something like the first major movement for linguistic rights or the like (I am sure it wasn't chosen as an international day for a specific reason) Not truly done yet, but what's there is kind of okay
  • The second para in the lead section is a good attempt at summarizing the history, but a rambling copy prevents it from being so. In fact the whole lead section needs massive overhaul. Wonderful work
  • The background section may include some of the scholarly arguments for inclusion of Bengali as a state language, and other published arguments. (I remember one brilliant article by Dr. Muhammad Shahidullah) Done
  • There should be some citing of the number of Urdu and Bengali speakers at the time in the section as well, to make it more complete. (the Umar book should have it)
  • It is really unclear about the real killing. How many people died? Can you name them? May be a list of people who died and how would help. Done
  • The final stages section has a awkward heading, and the quote at the end may well do good as footnote as the information it contains is already there. Done, but not sure of it myself
  • In the section on criticism and legacy, the criticism part is really missing. In fact the point in this section seems to be very much missing due to the writing style. Done as part of the re-organization and copyedit
  • The commemoration section may be renamed as "Artistic and cultural influence" or something like that. And, it should be more detailed to include other films, songs, novels, poems, paintings and sculptures inspired by the movement. I am looking up some now. And, please, include a mention of the brilliant political cartoons that came out then. (I remember a few highly celebrated cartoons by Dopiaza, the most famous East Bengal cartoonist of the time) Renamed as "Legacy", but the cartoons and more novels, poems and plays would be very nice - needs more work
  • I think the first Shahid Minar should show up in the chronologically sequenced part of the article, not in this section. Done
  • This section has nothing on the Ekushey Boi Mela, the biggest book fair in Bangladesh. Have it included. Done
  • Finally, I don't think the Bashir Al-Helal book can be used as the biggest source here. It is a good book, but leans a bit on the non-neutral side of presentation of things. How about using some from the "Documents of the Liberation War"? The first two volumes should have some really credible documents on the language movement. Withdrawn, though I have got some more references to put in, reading them through now
Well, these were my observations on the first look. I may have more eventually. Aditya Kabir 16:32, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Bashir Al Helal's book contains references of every information that it used which also includes from Documents of the Liberation War. There is no exact figure about the death tole as different sources came up with different numbers. But the most comprehensive one could be found from The Azad. Thanks Tarif from Bangladesh 18:54, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If different sources quote different numbers of death, then it would ideal to cite that fact along with the most quoted numbers together with major sources endorsing those numbers. Or, if one source is taken as valid, it may be validated as such. Aditya Kabir 07:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've gathered some numbers from reliable sources in the articles talk page so that it would be possible for anyone to follow anyone of your style. Tarif from Bangladesh 19:58, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • the names of the martyrs can be found inside the article. And how they died are inside their own article. So a separate list may not be necessary.
The names of the people who died (if you want to call them martyrs, please, state the reason why they should be addressed as such, the term is a bit overloaded) are dispersed in four-five places in the article, along with the circumstances of their death. It's unpleasant reading, and even less pleasant as a quick references. Aditya Kabir 07:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's worth mentioning about Muhammad Shahidullah's article because he was an important person and his writing helped a lot. But don't think it's conclusive enough to quote from him. May be we could take a few words from him, but it(the article of Shahidullah) carries some contradictions.
I'd propose not just Shahidullah, but other scholarly arguments are put in as well, at least the major ones. Currently the article is devoid of any reference to scholarly arguments. You don't need to quote anyone, but you still need to mention some of those. Aditya Kabir 07:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have gathered some major scholary arguments and put it in the talk page of the main article. The argument of Ziauddin Ahmed, Muhammad Shahidullah, Abul Mansur Ahmed, Dr. Enamul Haq, Motahar Hossain Chowdhury and Abdul Haq would be found there. Copy editors can include them into the main article if they want to. Thanks for help. Regards.. Tarif from Bangladesh 08:33, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • their is no absolute figure about how many people died. But at least eight people are confirmed to be dead, according to Bashir Al Helal's book. Amongst them biography of Rafiq, Salam, Jabbar, Barkat and Sofiur can be found. Their is also an eight year old boy named Ohidullah who's name and description are found.
This particular list of names is much better then the way they feature in the article itself. Can you use this a s template? And, Sofiur's name isn't there in the lead section. Aditya Kabir 07:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Template is a good idea. I was thinking about making template that would include martyrs(?), activists and political leaders who were involved with the movement in different sections. How would it be? Tarif from Bangladesh 07:46, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sueggestion I have created an infobox somewhat after the fashion of Template:Bir Sreshtho, but it needs more work (could be used on individual pages for the dead as well). Aditya Kabir 06:21, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A number of other issues remain unsolved, though. Especially the copyediting thingy. I have noticed that the copy has improved significantly in parts, but there's still a lot that remains to be done. Cheeres. Aditya Kabir 07:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
copyediting is improving very fast. Dwaipayan and |Aditya is working very well. It will finish before schedule.
Thanks-- Tarif from Bangladesh 06:10, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply to Aditya's oppose by Dwaipayan
Some of your concerns have been addressed.
    • The UNESCO bit in the lead has not been shifted up in order to maintain the chronologocal flow. Any suggestion on how to materialize your recommendation is welcome.
    • Place of the movement in the scheme of world history — not yet done.
    • Second para of the lead — changed a bit. Please see.
  • Scholarly arguments in background section — will be done, shortly.
    • Number os language speakers — done.
    • People who died — this information is now better spaced, under the subsections of "February 21" and "February 22".
    • Final stage section—yet to work on it.
    • Criticism and legacy—IMO there is quite a good amount of criticism for a movement generally regarded in a positive light.
    • Commemoration—IMO, name is ok, as it does not just have the names of the books, cinema etc.
    • First Shaheed minar is now in the chronological part of the article.
    • Ekushey boi mela has now been included.
    • Bashir Al-Helal book — I have no idea. Tarif has commented on it.--Dwaipayan (talk) 14:02, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have been asking for expert opinion around in Dhaka since I made my observation on the Al Helal book. It seems that only the fact part of the book has been used, and therefore the interpretations carried by the book should not be factor here. I withdraw that part of my opposition. ANd, congratulations on the wonderful work you've done in improving the article. I'm sure that a little more work would get all the objections out of the way. Well, let me dabble a bit into reorganizing stuff at the article, and take a look then. I may be wrong, but I'd still like to give it a try. Finally, I don't belive that chronological structures are the best for an encyclopedia. If we really must have one, then it is better to have a timeline section built into the article. Cheers. Aditya Kabir 14:24, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments The history section has major shortcomings. If we ignore the lead (which should be a summary of what's already in the article), the history section becomes absolutely cryptic for someone who is not familiar with the region. Where is "Bengal"? How is it related to "Northern India"? Another important lacking is that though the advent of Urdu is discussed with considerable detail, the history of Bengali has only one line to it. Why would people be so agitated about it, specially Bengali Muslims? Bengal Renaissance is ofcourse very important, but Bengali was patronised by Muslim Sultans long before that (see Abdul Hakim)--ppm 13:26, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reply Tried to elucidate the History so that the international audience can grasp the background. British India and early development of Bengali language included. Why people were agitated has been discussed in the second paragraph of history (despite being the language of the majority of people, use of Bengali was being sidelined etc). Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:17, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - It is well sourced and informative about the Bhasha Andolan. It ropvides a good sense of context and is captivating to the reader.Bakaman 17:25, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support Support - subject is important, writing is fine, citation is good, copyediting is brilliant. This article have gone through all stages successfully, the only stage that remaines is to be featured. Tarif from Bangladesh 20:32, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support Conditional Support : Article is well-written, but the references need to be cleaned up. For example, reference 7 needs page numbers. "Ekusher Shongkolon'80 Smriticharon, pp 102-103" is missing author/publisher names. Please fix them for this otherwise good article. --Ragib 20:58, 22 June 2007 (UTC) Changed to Strong support as all the issues raised here have been addressed. --Ragib 19:14, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reply to Ragib Citations have been fixed. Please have a look.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:09, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please remove the scrollbox from the reference section. It is not desirable to have such elements ... as they mess up the printable version. --Ragib 18:44, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I did it myself, and now the citations look ok. If needed, we can use reflist with 3 columns instead of 2 (since most of the references are quite short). --Ragib 19:14, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Fails criterion 1a. The prose is very hard to follow from the second sentence on. The word "agitate" is used five times in the lede alone. MarkBuckles (talk) 06:09, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agreed It still isn't anwhere near "compelling prose", even if we forget "brilliant prose". Aditya Kabir 06:24, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Position changed to conditional support. due to the tremendous efforts of Rama, Tarif, Deep, Dwaipayan and Riana the article has improved tremendously. But, a few issues still need attention before it becomes an FA. Here goes:
  • The refcites are not aligned to the MoS. They need to be formatted right.
  • There is a lot of vagueness in the article like - "clerks from many institution", "many legislators", "many construed the rejection", "some of the terms and conditions", "some of the treasury bench members", "destroyed within a few days", "a large number of Bengali students", "killing a number of students". Can we make these a bit more quantified or a bit more specific?
I'll try to fix "a few" of this. Tarif from Bangladesh 13:07, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The infobox needs attention, but it has a good possibility to become a useful navigation temnplate, too. We may work on this to make the number deaths and the list of names clear for quick reference.
  • There are too many section headers, I'm not sure if we need them all.
  • As far as I know, political cartoons became a mass media tool in Dhaka during the Language Movement. There really has to be something about that.
Murtoza Bashir and Dopiaza drawn most of the cartoons. We could include that. Tarif from Bangladesh 13:07, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The "Criticism" section needs to be firmed up. Most of the criticism put there is not criticism, but rather obvious fall outs of any political movement.
  • The "Legacy" section may have a mention of the other languages movements in Sindh and Baluchistan that was part of this article in an earlier version.
  • Only a few of the novels, poems, songs, films and plays have been mentioned. There is a lot more to go through. The current list doesn't even scratch the surface.
  • A mention of the first "memorial book" on 21 February, edited by Hasan Hafizur Rahman, is missing. It contained the Mambub Alam poem, the Abdul Latif song, and some of the cartoons.
  • The part of constitutional reform needs a mention of what was there earlier, like the "Urdu-only" clause or something. (May be a Pakistani editor can help here)
  • The Liberation of Bangladesh part is still written sketchily. Copyedit needed.
Very good work done, congratulations to all. And, I'm sorry that I haven't been able to help out more. And, oh, please, ask tony to take another look at this. Cheers. Aditya Kabir 06:21, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reply by Dwaipayan
  • Could not understand your first point ("refcites are not aligned to the MoS"). Please elaborate what is missing.
Check WP:CITET for the style guide for citing references. Aditya Kabir 15:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the inline citations use one or other of the templates. An exception is all the newspaper citations. Ok, I am converting those soon.--Dwaipayan (talk) 16:45, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow! That was a neat trick. That linking the notes to references. I must copy that trick. Wow!!! Aditya Kabir 19:03, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • vagueness—Source material is needed to remove the vagueness. Tariff and others with the source may help more.
  • Infoox is being worked on.
  • Curbed section headers in "Early stages of movement". IMO, events of 1952 needs the subsections. We can remove them, but it will become a long section. "Events after 1952" had no subsections initially. Now it has, after some rearrangement of structure. What do you think? Can we get rid of those subsections? For example, "Constitution reform" is a rather short subsection.
Yep, it's a rather short section, looks strange. But, I can't really figure out what to do. It is the winning point of the whole movement, and it doesn't sink with the previous section, though the chronological sequence is right. May be if movements for similar constitutional reforms in Sindh and Baluchistan is included, it may start looking better. And, it should also feature a line or two on what was there in the constitution before the amendment. What was the name of the amendment? How many votes did it get for or against? This important section may still grow. Aditya Kabir 17:28, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cartoons etc.—No idea. The main author(s) can help.
  • "Criticism"—I do not have any source of information. So I request the main author and others with source material to come up with information.
  • "Legacy"—same as criticism.
  • Please help mention more literary works etc.
  • "memorial book"—No idea. Please help.
Hasan Hafizur Rahman's book named Ekushey February was published on February 21, 1953 along with those poems and songs that Aditya already mentioned. This could be included.Tarif from Bangladesh 19:30, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, constitutional reforms may need some more info. Will try to find out.
  • Liberation of Bangladesh—will have a look soon. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 14:25, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Further comments. My late entry into the research has turned up some serious issues. Here goes:
  1. Apart from those mentioned two other people - Salauddin (died on 21st) and Obaidullah (on 22nd) can surely be verified, and needs to be included. Done
  2. There is nothing in the article about the East Bengal Language Committee formed in 1949 by the East Bengal government. It included Dr. Muhammad Shahidullah, Habibullah Bahar, Dr. Muazzem Hussein. The Committee completed its report on 6 December 1950, but it was published in 1958. The report proposed a compromise between rival parties - writing Bengali in Arabic script. (Report of the East Bengal Language Committee, 1958, Officer on Sepcial Duty (Home Department), East Pakistan Government Press, Dhaka, pp 2, 3, 115) Done
  3. It may also be mentioned that the proposal to write Bengali in Arabic script was endorsed by AKM Fazlul Haque (Azad, 24.05.1950) Done
  4. On 22 February 1952, the people didn't just burn down the Jubilee Press (please, capitalize Jubilee Press), but more importantly they burnt down the office and press of Morning News, the leading anti-Bengali newspaper of the time. (Azad, 23.02.1952) Done
  5. There is nothing on Maulana Abdur Rashid Tarkabagish in the article.
  6. Are Ghulam Azam and Golam Azam the same person? Then the former spelling is incorrect. Done
  7. There is nothing on the happenings in Narayanganj. On 25 February 1952 the industrial workers of that town observed a full-day general strike (Azad 26.02.1952). On 29th a big procession came out in the town to face severe police beating. Educationist Mumtaz Begum and elected people's representative Osman Ali was arrested from that procession. (Umar, Purbobanglar Bhasha Andilon o Totkalin Rajneeti, 3rd Volume, pp 417-418) Done

I am working to get through to more stuff. The issue raised by Mark is serious one, and I somewhat am inclined to agree to him. Please, get some help from the copyeditor's league. The two people I know in the league Fowler&fowler and Editor-at-large seem to be busy elsewhere. Cheers. Aditya Kabir 15:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Reply
Regarding the point (2) in your "Further comments", this site on Shahidullah says, " East Bengal Language Committee, under the presidentship of Maulana Akram Khan, declared in a report that attempts to introduce the Bengali language in Arabic Script must be slopped for at least next twenty years." If you have the primary source, we have to abide by that though. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 16:04, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Committee report was a government dictated collabroartion, while the source you cite gives Shahidullah's personal opinions. These two facts are not in contradiction, but, to avoid dispute, we may put in Shahidullah's peronal views together with the position of the Committee. Aditya Kabir 16:34, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update on Aditya's further comments
  • Salauddin (died on 21st) and Obaidullah (on 22nd)—Plesae provide references and add. This is not a problem. I myself somewhere saw the name of Obaidullah (or, Ohidullah?).
I'll need help on this, too. Tarif, where are you? Help. Aditya Kabir 19:03, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • East Bengal Language Committee—Now included, along with a web reference. However, the proposal of the commitee as noted in the website (which is a PhD thesis report) is not tallying with source you are citing. The website says, "The East Bengal Language Committee, under the presidentship of Maulana Akram Khan, declared in a report that attempts to introduce the Bengali language in Arabic Script must be slopped for at least next twenty years." besides noting Shahidullah's personal views.Please verify. Also, the date of your source seems to be wrong, it cannot be 1946.
Sorry about that. My mistake. That's be 1958.
  • Fazlul Haque endorsing included.
  • Jubilee Press and Morning News included.
  • Maulana Abdur Rashid Tarkabagish—I do not have any idea if his action was very significant. Well, he left the Muslim League and joined Awami, this must have been unique. Have not included it yet.
Tarif, can you step in? The maulana was propably a much more active person than most people mentioned in the article. Aditya Kabir 19:03, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I can try. I also think he is important. He was in the treasury bench but proactive against the government's policy. I'll try to handle this. Tarif from Bangladesh 19:37, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
i included Tarkabagish along with the fact that even though he was a treasury bench member, he asked Nurul Amin to adjourn the parliament and visit to the hospital to see the injured people. Besides this he also resigned from the party (On February 23 with his fellow parliamentarian Abul Kalam Shamsuddin (on February 22). Have that included if you feel so. citation from pp.455-458 of Al Helal. Tarif from Bangladesh 23:24, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Golam Azam spelling done.
  • Happenings in Narayanganj included.--Dwaipayan (talk) 16:45, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • the little boy who died on February died on February 22 is named Ohiullah. At some places it is mistakely written as Obaidullah or Ohidullah. But none of them is correct. I myself also made mistake about it before. Anyway it will be Ohiullah O-H-I-U-L-L-A-H. He died on February 22, 1952 near a restaurant at Nawabpur when he was struck in his head with a bullet. The news of his death was mentioned later in weekly Notun Din on Falgun 11, 1362(we have to do some math to convert the date). This information would be found in page.483 of Bashir al helal book.
    even though February 22 edition of Azad wrote that a 26 year old M. A. student named 'Mohammad Salauddin died at the spot, it was later proved that no people by that name died. Informations about this fact could be found from page 406-410 of Bashir's book. Both of these facts can be mentioned in the article if necessary. Tarif from Bangladesh 19:30, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • One more comment Congratulations to Dwaipayan and Tarif (and also Deep, Ragib, Riana, Baka and Arman). I am sure Nirav the Rama's Arrow would have been utterly proud of this gang had he been around. I have run out of all opposition, almost. Please, if possible, work on the copy a bit more. I know Tony and Mark to be very particular about copyedit. And, there's a proposition about the title on the article talk page. Take a look. Aditya Kabir 16:47, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it seems issues have a starnge way to pop up. Just when I was thinking there's nothing left but the copy, two more new issues came up:
  • Riana suggests that the title be changed to "The language movement" or "The Language Movement" (I like the former). But, the question is how do we do that. Ragib, you got any idea? Done
  • Kyoko suggests an incoproration of, ideally in the lead, some clarification about what this "state language" (or would it be "national language" as the constituion calls it?) thing actually implies. The answer should be - use in government work, medium of instruction in mid level studies and use in court documents (also inclsuion on stamps and currency). But, can't find any references for that. Tarif, is there anything in your enormous collection of sources? Done
  • The copy is getting a very good overhaul, and Editor at large is waiting at the wings to make a host of minor fixes. Things certainly are looking brighter. Aditya Kabir 04:01, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, no idea about references. By the way this was mentioned as the state language in the first ever constitution of Pakistan in 1956. On March 1, 1962 Ayub Khan changed it to National language. But in Bangladesh's first constitution Bengali was again mentioned as Rashtrabhasa or the State language. Language activists have always mentioned about State language not national language. So I think we should call it 'State Language. Regards Tarif from Bangladesh 11:49, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Aditya Kabir 21:10, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, despite the fact that I mentioned, I think the current combination of having both State Language and National Language. Because there is not much to differentiate between the meaning of those two and keep saying the same thing may be boring. So its ok. Thanks Tarif from Bangladesh 19:43, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question—Why did this change to an article with "The" in the title (see WP:MSH)? Also, the capitalization in the article name doesn't agree with the first line in the article. Also, was WP:GA updated ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:55, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Answer - "Language movement" was not being very specific, it could mean any movement about a language. Putting a "The" and capitalization makes it particular, and since it's UN sanctioned, it can be accepted as alright. The GA should reach there by the redirect. Capitalization should be corrected throughout the article. Aditya Kabir 21:10, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The title was changed per discussion in talk page of the article. Yes, it is rather rare per WP:MSH to have "The" in title. So please advice. Do you suggest "Language Movement"? And Sandy, since you seem to be back, can you just have a quick look of references? I have tried to fix those. Still, I may have missed some. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 05:58, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe the "The" should be there, per WP:MSH (and I noticed that banglapedia has no "The"). I had a quick glance at the refs and they seem generally fine (what is The Azad? more info needed), but See also is incorrect; navigational templates belong at the bottom of the article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:16, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Response to Sandy "See also&amp;quot; section removed. navigation templates now at the end of the article. Will add more info on Azad soon. (Request to Tariff for adding the publisher's name at least on one occasion, preferable the first occasion The Azad appears in the "Citations").
Regarding the title, Sandy has much more knowledge and experience on WP:MSH than any of us. And it is written there not to include "The" in the title. So I propose to change the title to "Language Movement". If no one comments anything more, the title will be changed soon. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Azad was a daily newspaper and one of the most famous dailies in the region during the time of the movement. First editor of the daily was [[|Akram Khan (politician)|Maulana Akram Khan]]. Abul Kalam Shamsuddin was the editor of it during the movement. Not sure about the publisher, he himself probably was the publisher at that time. Tarif from Bangladesh 19:14, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, Abul Kalam Shamsuddin was the editor of The Azad at that time. Dwaipayan has included this information. Tarif from Bangladesh 11:39, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I find the new title "The Language Movement" a bit awkward, though I am also concerned that if the article were named simply "Language Movement", it might be understood as an article on the movement and spread of a language, until the reader looks beyond the title. I suppose I don't have a strong preference either way. --Kyoko 14:21, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The title has been changed to "Language Movement".--Dwaipayan (talk) 16:53, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Position changed to really strong support, and congratulations to all. Just remove that part of Fazlul Haque's endorsement. I have read through his argument at the parliament in verbatim, and the interpretetion that he supported urdu seems to be a bit of a overstatement. Aditya Kabir 05:22, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: This article certainly has come a long way with valuable additions from the users. However, the criticism section could still use some re-write. What is the context of the statement "Several Bengali politicians such as Maulana Bhashani, Golam Azam, Motiur Rahman Nizami and Shah Azizur Rahman were alienated from the Awami League and subsequent Bengali nationalist agitations"? Why were they alienated and how is that related to the Language Movement? Also there seems to be sevaral different points on criticism - it is very difficult to separate one from the other.-Arman Aziz 07:00, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the relative mis-management of this FAC. (Hope you can understand, the nominator is not active now in Wikipedia). I tried to address one of your concerns on Criticism (you commented in tariff's talk page). I'll try to address your concern ASAP. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Some works done on Criticism. How do you feel now? Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 16:09, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The info on Golam Azam will require an in-line citation, although it was a very good job done. Cheers. Aditya Kabir 16:46, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks and it is clearer now. I've updated my position to strong support.-Arman Aziz 00:20, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Well written and referenced article. It must be a FA.Amartyabag TALK2ME 12:06, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Deserves to be a FA. - P.K.Niyogi 13:44, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update Following a discussion in the talk page of the article, the article has been moved to "Bengali Language Movement".--Dwaipayan (talk) 16:09, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The article meets the FA criteria. The one issue that was raised early in the FAC (quality of language and the need of copyedit) has been managed by the League of Copyeditors and also by several other extremely helpful Wikipedians. Thank you everybody :) --Dwaipayan (talk) 05:29, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Bengali_Language_Movement&oldid=1138455888"