Talk:Malaun

This article was nominated for deletion on 23 February 2015 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Bangladesh Low‑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

Low

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

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.

India: West Bengal Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-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 January 2015.

hi

letts discuss this 171.243.49.12 (talk) 16:39, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What's with all those percentage?

first of all this an article about emitology of a word not about percentage of hindus in Bangladesh. Percentage doesn't prove or disprove anything. Bangladeshi Muslims simply have high fertility rate than Hindus because Islam discouraged birth-controll and encouraged more child. Abortions is completely prohibited. Naturally perchantage of Muslim increased because of their high fertility rate and consequently perchantage of hindus dropped.

I feel the editor is extremely biased towards Bangladeshi muslim. Does he trying to imply that there was some hindu genocide that was the reason of percentage fall? 1% of Bangladesh population 2M. So don't go and point some random event to connect it to the fall of percentage of hindu in Bangladesh.

What was reason of putting those unirelated information about percentage? Please give me some valid reason or I will have to delete those unrelated part. Dark1618 (talk) 12:15, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There’s no need to research which editor was biased and who wasn’t. Do not share personal thoughts.

No original research is allowed. See: WP:NOR

And any information that is added must be supported by WP:RS. Somajyoti ✉ 15:24, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I asked what was the point of percentage in this article? Editor just added it without any further explanation why it was related to this particular word.

Oviously I have the right to ask about neutrality of an article. See: WP:NPOV- Dark1618 (talk) 19:08, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you have any reliable sources, you may cite the information supported by them. Somajyoti ✉ 19:49, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.

I am removing this unrelated part about percentage. It is not related this article. Dark1618 (talk) 19:57, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How will you remove that! That information is backed by a report published by the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics. Somajyoti ✉ 20:08, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

this article is about a word not about percentage of hindu. No need to overwhelm this article with unrelated information.

P.S: the wording of sencence is incorrect. Hindu are not regularly persecuted by Razakar. 'Razakar' is the word only used in the context of 1971 war. Dark1618 (talk) 20:24, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dark1618 I made the same objection. This article is for term. Things relevant to the term should be in this article. Demographics isn't relevant for a term. Hence it should be removed. Beylarbey (talk) 05:15, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]