Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bangladesh

WP:DSBD

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Bangladesh. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Bangladesh|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Bangladesh. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Asia.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bangladesh/archive

Purge page cache

watch

See also: Wikipedia:Notice board for Bangladesh-related topics

Bangladesh

Md Ziaul Hoque

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

The article's sources are routine or otherwise not WP:SIGCOV. A search has turned up no sources that would qualify as significant or secondary in order to meet WP:GNG. Garsh (talk) 21:28, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Bangladesh. Shellwood (talk) 22:10, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fazle Hasan Shishir

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

The article doesn't meet WP:NFILMMAKER. Producing non notable films doesn't justify notability, and that's the opposite to the page creator's stance. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 07:07, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Bangladesh. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 07:08, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete: Sources included seem to be a series of WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS (or university newsletters), and the content is almost entirely promotional in nature. Meets criteria for an A7 or even G11 speedy delete. pluckyporo ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:33, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mehdi_Hasan_Khan

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Mehdi Hasan Khan

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

I'm the subject in the article. I regard myself as a non-notable and private person. There are millions of people who create open-source software and that shouldn't be the bar for having a biography on Wikipedia. Furthermore, this page contains personal information on me, and my family members without any citation/source and violates their privacy as well. Mehdihasankhan (talk) 07:55, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I removed the spouse and child's names. APK hi :-) (talk) 08:17, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This seems like a straightforward case of WP:BLP1E and WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE. Naming the author in the Avro Keyboard article makes sense, but I don't see any other need for an article about him. Adam Sampson (talk) 10:36, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bangladesh. Shellwood (talk) 10:50, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine, Computing, and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Avro Keyboard. Mehedi Abedin 12:07, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Avro Keyboard.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 23:47, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comilla Girls' College

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

Non-notable school. No WP:RS and unlikely any exist. Fails WP:GNG, WP:NORG. Cabrils (talk) 02:12, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Bangladesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:18, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Md Nahid Islam

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

No indication of notability per WP:CREATIVE. Main claim to fame is that he was the youngest professional sports photographer. Articles was draftified yesterday from Md. Nahid Islam, sourced only with the dailycricket.com.bn sports blog post. Today it's been recreated with a second sports blog post from rabsportsnews.com, dated today, not a good sign of an independent source. A WP:BEFORE search turned up no coverage in reliable sources in English or Bengali (নাহিদ ইসলাম). Editors searching for any RS I missed please note that Nahid Islam is an unrelated activist. Wikishovel (talk) 16:13, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Photography, Cricket, Football, and Bangladesh. Wikishovel (talk) 16:13, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:52, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Just a journalist doing his job, with no established notability. Svartner (talk) 01:50, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NBIO. I could find no reliable sources to establish notability. Ratekreel (talk) 15:53, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:13, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:13, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:17, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Salt: given it was re-created after draftification, title should be salted as well. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 01:02, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - besides the subject’s lack of significant coverage about him, the page is very poorly written. It’s not even an article. Bearian (talk) 02:26, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Myself Allen Swapan

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

Reviewed during New page Patrol. No evidence of wp:notability under GNG or SNG. Bangladeshi streaming-only series. Of the two references, one is a review and the other is a link to their own commercial. Article was deleted in 2023 due to creation by a banned user and recreated February 2024 by a new user . North8000 (talk) 11:35, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Bangladesh. Shellwood (talk) 12:19, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:19, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: 1) given a review is cited a redirect to Syndicate_(TV_series)#Spin off is warranted ; 2) but there is plenty of coverage on this (including bylined articles), for example https://www.dhakatribune.com/showtime/309335/‘myself-allen-swapan’-streaming-this-eid ; https://www.tbsnews.net/splash/myself-allen-swapan-when-spin-outperforms-its-parent-series-622514 ; https://www.indiatoday.in/binge-watch/story/what-happens-when-a-wanted-criminal-pretends-to-be-your-husband-2366489-2023-04-30 : -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:28, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1979 Bangladesh-Indian skirmishes

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

No significant casualties, no WP:LASTING coverage. Wikipedia discourages articles based on WP:NOTNEWS and this is nothing more than that. Nxcrypto Message 14:34, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Bangladesh, and India. Shellwood (talk) 14:39, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:44, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - article seems well sourced, and several sources are in the late 2010s, some 40 years after the conflict itself, making a nonsense of the “no lasting coverage” claim… it’s… difficult not to see this as politically based spamming since the last couple of nominations on Indian-Bangladeshi border skirmishes from this same editor are just cut and paste, and they have nominated other similar articles last week too… I’ll assume good faith though, and just say that I disagree that the article meets the criteria for deletion based on the merits. Absurdum4242 (talk) 15:45, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It is a notable incident, Lasting effect? It did have some. Nxcrypto, I noticed that you are copying the same message in similar AfD Discussions, Without even checking the page and It's content and aftermath a lot. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (Message)
True The 1979 clash is very notable and it does not violate Wikipedia's standards for inclusion. Nxcrypto for some reason is copying and pasting the same message in multiple AfD Discussions, And some people will not check the page and just want to delete it, So they will say "It does not establish WP:GNG and WP:Lasting", Even when, It is clearly notable event with coverage many years later. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (Message)
Citations - The page has several citations including from books and newspapers, some require subscription or have limited information but I think the page meets with General Notability Guidelines. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (Talk with BangladeshiEditorInSylhet)
Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. Creating an article by collecting outdated archives instead of modern sources ensures that the subject failed to attract lasting coverage. --Dympies (talk) 03:58, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 04:32, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The incident was itself so insignificant that it makes sense why it fails WP:GNG. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 15:14, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 16:44, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I remain confused at how the three last-minute delete votes on the day this was set to close can claim a lack of “modern sources” when the Indian Foreign Policy book, for example, was first written in 2007, with the 7th edition being linked to being published in 2018. Add in the cut and paste nature of the original nomination and… as much as I hate to suggest everyone isn’t arguing in good faith, this feels like brigading?

Also…. I don’t think that’s how WP:NOTNEWS works? Given that this happened almost 50 years ago? Absurdum4242 (talk) 18:11, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Absurdum4242: Notwithstanding how other participants have phrased it, WP:LASTING refers to lasting effects, not lasting coverage. The single 75-word paragraph in the book is lasting coverage, and distinguishes this event from some discussed at AfD recently which have none, but that paragraph's conclusion is telling: "forces of the two countries clashed but the tension soon cooled down." Nothing significant happened. No one was killed, injured, or taken prisoner; no territory, booty, or reparations changed hands; no new method of determining the border was adopted; no treaty was signed. The event was not a precedent or catalyst for anything. There were no lasting effects. The paragraph in the book suggests that the event may be worth a paragraph in an article more broadly focused on Bangladesh-India border relations. It is not suitable for a stand alone article. --Worldbruce (talk) 03:55, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, so the correct WP would be WP:Continuedcoverge instead, where “ The duration of coverage is a strong indicator of whether an event has passing or lasting significance.”? Absurdum4242 (talk) 04:39, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Passes WP:GNG, enough coverage in WP:RS including editorials. Za-ari-masen (talk) 10:14, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Radio Colony Model School and College

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

Deleted via PROD last year, recently recreated as a translation of bn:রেডিও কলোনি মডেল স্কুল এন্ড কলেজ. Meets neither WP:GNG nor WP:ORG, so fails WP:NSCHOOL. Searches in English and Bengali found nothing but passing mentions and indiscriminate directory listings. Without significant coverage in multiple, independent, reliable, secondary sources, should not be a stand alone article. Worldbruce (talk) 08:10, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Bangladesh. Worldbruce (talk) 08:10, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 08:40, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Dhaka District, where it is not presently mentioned, but where a section on the district schools would be due. There is only enough information for a few lines in such a section. Insufficient sourcing to meet GNG for a standalone page. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:50, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bhottopara

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

Disputed draftification. WP:GNG failure. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:45, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:45, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:05, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment As I understand WP:NGEO as Legally recognized settlements are considered notable. This seems to be a recognized village.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 12:10, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
at this point, delete It may be a village, it may be a neighborhood; who knows? User is going through and using some hidden source to make a bunch of unverifiable stubs. It's bad enough when a known-to-be-unreliable source is used, but we have no idea here and the onus shouldn't be on us to figure out what source was used. Mangoe (talk) 10:32, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Mangoe: "Who knows?" Well, the original cited source says Bhattapara (admittedly a different transliteration) is a village. So does the source Vinegarymass911 added. Moreover, the 2011 Bangladeshi census says Bhat Para (yes, a third transliteration - welcome to the inconvenient world of Bengali names) is a village in Madhnagar Union of what was then Natore Sadar Upazila (since 2013 in Naldanga Upazila) with a population of 595. The coordinates make sense, smack in the middle of a built-up blob in Google Maps, next to Bhattopara Primary School (transliteration #4) and down the street from Bhattapara Central Mosque. They're within 1 second in each direction of the coordinates for the Bhattapara in Rajshahi Division in the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency's Geographic Names Server. So there's little question that it's a village, a legally recognized populated place. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:47, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
comment I don't believe these trivial "xxx is a village" articles are a net benefit to the encyclopedia. People often say we should keep them because Wikipedia is, among other things, a gazetteer. Gazetteers, however, are mostly a list of one-sentence descriptions, they don't have a separate page or article about every entry. There are about 1,500 villages in Natore District. Fortunately there are not (yet) articles for many of them in Wikipedia. Is there any appetite for merging/redirecting this and other Category:Villages in Natore District into a new "List of villages in Natore District" article that would serve the purpose of a gazetteer without creating thousands of stubs? --Worldbruce (talk) 17:38, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 22:38, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Naldanga Upazila where I've added it to an incomplete list of villages. It's not really clear what locale is being referenced in the second source, since Basudebpur Union (which is still in Rajshahi District) doesn't mention it in their list of villages. Madhnagar union does include it so if/when a Madhnagar union page is created it can be listed and redirected there. JoelleJay (talk) 16:45, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alockdia

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

Disputed draftification. Fails WP:GNG and geographic criteria 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:43, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:43, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:05, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
at this point, delete User is going through and using some hidden source to make a bunch of unverifiable stubs. It's bad enough when a known-to-be-unreliable source is used, but we have no idea here and the onus shouldn't be on us to figure out what source was used. Settlements are so thick on the ground in this region that GMaps is useless, notwithstanding the language issue. Mangoe (talk) 10:35, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Mangoe: Yes it's a stub, but hidden source and unverifiable? The first sentence of the cited Daily Sun article says (admittedly using a transliteration without the "c"): "... Alokdia village in Kalidah union of Feni Sadar Upazila ...". That supports the entire body of the stub. The infobox contains coordinates, which are not in the newspaper article, but Google Maps show them to be in the middle of a pair of built-up area blobs bounded by Alockdia Mastar Para Link Rd and Alockdia Rd, surrounded by Alokdia Bitun Nur Jame Masjid, Alockdia Kazi Bari Jameh Masjid, Alockdia Baitul Aman Jame Masjid, and Alockdia Kendrio Jame Masjid, Alockdia Forkania Moktob, Alockdia Pharma and Departmental store, and Mannan bhuiyan Market, Alockdia (or Alockdia Sporting Club, according to the sign), so calling the map "useless" rings false. The 2011 Bangladeshi census confirms that Alokdia is a village in the stated union, upazila, and district, and says its population at that time was 2,769. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:45, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
comment One can debate whether WP:5P1's "Wikipedia combines many features of ... and gazetteers" and WP:GEOLAND's "presumed to be notable" mean that verifiable, legally recognized villages should be kept, which WP:PLACEOUTCOMES says they typically are, but the rationales for deletion given so far are unconvincing. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:50, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 22:37, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]