Talk:2007 Bangladesh cartoon controversy

Prothom Alo citations
All the external links provided of Prothom Alo could go dead from tomorrow. I'll try to add english dailies reports as well. Thanks --Tarif from Bangladesh 13:27, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Different opinion
Actually there's a lot of different opinion as well. In fact protests are basically powered by extremists. General people are struggling to find anything to protest. Many blogsites are filled with comments where Motiur Rahman is criticized for his apology and his other initiatives. But understandebly there's nothing about it in newspapers. So sorry about not giving those informations. --Tarif from Bangladesh 10:42, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Rename article
I think the article should be renamed "Bangladesh cartoons controversy" or "Alpine cartoons controversy" or maybe "Prothom Alo cartoons controversy" since this is the primary subject and the reason for its notability. → AA (talk) — 11:18, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * This is not the only reason for it's notability, of course. But currently this seems to be the only subject for Alpin. And I think the name should be Alpin, google search and news reports suggests that. Regards --Tarif from Bangladesh 12:06, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Purely going by convention, this issue should be in an article of its own (e.g. Alpine cartoon controversy) in the same manner as some of the other similar controversies. This does not preclude the creation of an article for Alpine - just that convention shows this incident is notable in itself. → AA (talk) — 12:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

DYK suggestion
"an edition of Alpin, a supplement of the Bangladeshi newspaper Prothom Alo, was banned by the caretaker government for publishing a controversial cartoon in relation to the Islamic prophet Muhammad" How about that? → AA (talk) — 13:47, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Submitted here. → AA (talk) — 14:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Politically motivated article excerpt at the end
The placement of the article is politically motivated and is of low importance.

The last part about blogger's finding same joke that in a political paper is fully political. I dont like Shibir but wikipedia is not the place to discuss that or hint on my disliking. Also Wikipedia is not a newspaper. The article has a feel of reading a news in the papers. Also in the references section putting somewhereinblog.net's blog is totally unacceptable in Wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.154.194 (talk) 01:40, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The blog reference is appropriate since it was uncovered by the bloggers (according to what I've read). Nevertheless, I have removed the link and replaced it with a newspaper ref which mentions it. As far as the political and newslike nature of the article, it does have some resemblance to other "cartoon" controversies which all have articles on Wikipedia. The criteria for a Wiki entry is notability and verifiability which this article fulfills and there is further scope for expansion to include other elements of Alpin - rather than just this one controversy. → AA (talk) — 09:29, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * spot on, mate! --Tarif from Bangladesh 10:32, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on 2007 Bangladesh cartoon controversy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090713232212/http://www.theindependent-bd.com:80/details.php?nid=57840 to http://www.theindependent-bd.com/details.php?nid=57840

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 21:30, 21 January 2016 (UTC)