Talk:Amar Desh

Iffy article as is
Charges were filed against Rahman, not the paper, for articles he published. Yes, the government shut down the printing press, but the campaign was not really against the paper. I think the article is kind of stretching the point, while not establishing data and content that should be available: number of employees, circulation, print and online operations, distribution, influence, strengths, etc. How has the paper changed under Rahman as editor? Or has it? What are the relations between him and the publisher? One dust-up seemed to be between them, but it's hard to read between the lines. More should probably be written about how he has become a cause of human rights and press freedom groups; he had acted against newspapers when he was a minister of BNP, so this is a turnabout. What do more neutral sources say about his work? The articles published? He has been editor for just about as long as Awami League has been in control of government. Parkwells (talk) 00:32, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree the particulars need filled in. It is not accurate to say that the campaign was only against M. Rahman as the Awami League party was trying to shut Amar Desh down just as it had shut down other media outlets that have opposed it under Bangladesh's censorship law. Crtew (talk) 20:01, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I think Crtew is misguided by his Bangladeshi friends. Not only Awami League, but also BNP-Jammat alliance is responsible for shuting down media (e.g. Ekushe TV). Amar Desh were shut down due to its license moreover this news paper is responsible for hacking ICT justice's conversation. What is your opinion about "News International" shut down for hacking charge? Whats about trial of Bradley Manning for his involvement with WikiLeaks ? I think you have lack of WP:Good Faith in editing Bangladesh related articles.-- FreemesM  (talk) 01:41, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

COPY FORK and POV FORK violations
See Mahmudur Rahman page to discuss.Crtew (talk) 22:08, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Warning against disruptive editing
Freemesm has violated WP:Impartial and WP:Undue after a series of edits over several days that are disruptive. He has been warned that any further disruptive POV edits will be reported. Crtew (talk) 21:58, 18 April 2013 (UTC)