Talk:Persecution of Muslims in Myanmar

Insufficient sources
The article has a big self-pity value and does not quote sufficient sources. The article deliberately obfuscates the line between Burmese nationalism and religious tensions. A major failure in terms of neutrality and is more like a reposting of Moshe Yegar's book.

Please clean up to do actual justice to the people of Myanmar, regardless of race and religion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.69.203.1 (talk) 05:44, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Related template
User burfreedemo produces Chris 03:15, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I am not sure how to make edits properly.

But the section on 2012 says that 2000+ have been massacred and has a reference. I read the reference and it says that the number of those killed (on all sides) is still less than 100 people...

So, the article says something wholly unsupported the actual reference used. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.248.28.151 (talk) 18:38, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Muslims in Burmese history
Persecution can only be said when the killing is based on communal divide. The article does not differentiate between them. Under the sub-headings like Assassination of Nga Yaman Khan and Massacre in Arakan, the killings are not due to religious reasons. For example, in the Arakan heading, the killing was not directed against the Muslim identity. Read the book The Peacock Throne: The Drama of Mogul India by Waldemar Hansen. You may see the link http://books.google.co.in/books?id=AV--abKg9GEC&pg=PA318&lpg=PA318&dq=Gulrukh+Banu&source=bl&ots=iI-jQ2IE3e&sig=Pl9_DYbWfN7JSzzOuEt4j6L4Oes&hl=en&sa=X&ei=iwQQUIC2H6iYmQWCpoGQCQ&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=Gulrukh%20Banu&f=false. The king of Arakan is actually a barbaric pirate. Also, the article does not talk much about persecution and concentrates on the history of Muslims in Myanmar. History of Muslims in Myanmar would make a separate article. History may be provided in brief on how Muslims arrived there and the cultural interactions. Muslims in Burmese History heading can be contain this. Heading on persecution with different times, can be another section with required previous content in section mentioned earlier.

The article puts too much spotlight on Indian diaspora in Myanmar. Though the point cannot be ignored, it must come up in the article as a parallel information or as an attached piece.

Merge to Islam in Burma
This article seems to be formulated in such a way so that a neutral point of view cannot be readily achieved. The title ("Persecution of Muslims in Burma") reads like an invitation to talk about how bad one side of the issue is. See POV fork. Perhaps a merge to Islam in Burma is advised. NTox · talk 19:20, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * There doesn't seem to be much support for such a move, and I think I'm opposed myself. Since this discussion doesn't seem to be moving forward, is it all right with you if I remove the very stale proposed move tag? If you'd like to reopen the discussion, though, feel free to revert me--we can bring in some more heads on this one. -- Khazar2 (talk) 03:06, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

No need of separate article
I think there is no need of separate article for islam in Myanmar. as it is already have all the details require. this article should be deleted. as it shows only one side of conflict and not another. very bias marshmir (talk) 15:06, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Censorship
For your information, this article was blocked in India as a part of censorship in India. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 10:12, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

New Physicians for Human Rights report on Meiktila Violence
https://s3.amazonaws.com/PHR_Reports/Burma-Meiktila-Massacre-Report-May-2013.pdf

Is it time to create a separate article titled Meiktila Massacre?

04:42, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 one external links on Persecution of Muslims in Myanmar. 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/20070312172250/http://www.khrg.org:80/khrg2002/khrg0202.html to http://www.khrg.org/khrg2002/khrg0202.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120824010149/http://myanmar.com/newspaper/nlm/index.html to http://www.myanmar.com/newspaper/nlm/index.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121013140104/http://www.mofa.gov.mm/pressrelease/Press_Release_Rakhine_State_Affairs_Webversion(21-08-12).pdf to http://www.mofa.gov.mm/pressrelease/Press_Release_Rakhine_State_Affairs_Webversion%2821-08-12%29.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130629034258/http://www.mizzima.com:80/news/myanmar/9593-u-wirathu-accuses-time-reporter-of-fabricating-hate-speech to http://www.mizzima.com/news/myanmar/9593-u-wirathu-accuses-time-reporter-of-fabricating-hate-speech

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 10:02, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Negative actions commited by the muslim minority against the Burmese people
I dont know where to enter my concerns about the fairness and fair balance about this article, I have been following the relations between Burma and its muslim poplulation. The entire aricle is extreamly one sided and fails to be fair to the burmese government and its people. There are a lot of negative actions commited by the muslim minority against the Burmese people. I have a lot incidents that well documented that could be cited and are not just an opinion. The fear of the Burmese people is legitimate and shouch be addressed. If anyone following this aricle could respond with directions I would greatly appreciate. In a case where the editors would chose to remain one sided, is there a place I could just state that not everyone agrees with the content of the article without changing it. I strongly believe in the fair balance and would be thrilled to see wikipedia allow both views. - — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.88.49.189 (talk • contribs)
 * Wikipedia is neither fair nor objective. If it were 1939 its articles would reflect the Third Reich's views and dismiss all others as "unreliable". 217.91.160.45 (talk) 13:46, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Merge from Rohingya persecution in Myanmar, leave redirect

 * The degree of logical overlap between these two articles is very large. Roughly half of this article (including half its lede) is about Rohingya persecution in Myanmar. Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 07:44, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Vinegarymass. Jebiguess (talk) 22:14, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose. That article is quite lengthy already. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:36, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose, the majority of Rohingya are Muslim, but not all Muslims in Myanmar are Rohingya.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 14:49, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose, beyond the scope difference that Vinegarymass911 points out, there is also a scope difference in the temporality, where the Rohingya genocide article deals with a series of escalation from the 2010s to the 2020s, whereas this article (Persecution of Muslims in Myanmar) covers all historical occurences for which we have evidence (from the 1500s to the 2000s). --Cdjp1 (talk) 21:37:49, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Crimes against humanity category removal
Crimes against humanity is a specific legal concept. In order to be included in the category, the event (s) must have been prosecuted as a crime against humanity, or at a bare minimum be described as such by most reliable sources. Most of the articles that were formerly in this category did not mention crimes against humanity at all, and the inclusion of the category was purely original research. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:49, 14 February 2024 (UTC)