Talk:International Hope School Bangladesh

Wrong article. This is not about Turkish Hope School...

This article is wrong. it is a copy of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_School_Dhaka. this article needs revision. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.160.118.114 (talk) 11:30, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Got it! The article was mistakenly overwritten on 7 February 2012 with the then contents of International School Dhaka, and has remained largely in that condition since then. Unfortunately, recent edits aiming to rectify this have been highly promotional, copying large portions of the school website, and have had to be reverted. The article needs to be completely rewritten in an encyclopedic style and without violating copyright: Noyster (talk), 09:16, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Article has now been reverted to its state before it was overwritten, cleaned up and shortened, and updated from the school website. It now needs additions based on sources outside the school. What, for instance, do the Turkish International schools in different countries have in common?: Noyster (talk), 10:18, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Edit requests

Fatihmolla (talk) 04:10, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

 Not done Fatihmolla This page is not protected, you can edit it directly, additionally - your protected edit request is empty. — xaosflux ^Talk 04:32, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Alumni

Fatihmolla - It's important to understand that the Wikipedia article on ITHS isn't an advertisement for the school. If there are notable facts about the school's pupils/alumni, these are backed up by reliable sources, and they are not unbalanced then they should stay in. They certainly should not be removed by a member of the school's staff, such as yourself, just because the school's management doesn't think they present the desired image. KJP1 (talk) 09:19, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

As previously discussed, editors with connections to the school, e.g. staff members, should discuss concerns regarding the content here, rather than making unilateral changes. It is a well-sourced and notable fact that seven of the attackers in the July 2016 Dhaka attack came from affluent backgrounds and attended prestigious private schools, including Nibras Islam who attending ITHS. Their affluent backgrounds are often a focus of the media coverage, e.g. the BBC report, "The attackers are all Bangladeshis from rich families and with good educations, according to Bangladeshi's home minister Asaduzzaman Khan." It is therefore incorrect to state that mention of Nibras Islam "does not mirror the reality" (edit summary from editor ITHS made when removing the content). By all means discuss your objections to its inclusion, but don't unilaterally delete it. KJP1 (talk) 14:09, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

@ITHS: You may not remove reliably sourced information against consensus. However much you may dislike the information, reports by The Australian, the BBC, The Daily Star, DAWN, the Dhaka Tribune, The Independent, and Prothom Alo are hardly "terrorist propoganda" that "does not mirror the reality", as you stated in your edit summary. Any concern you have about the sentence in question should be discussed here, on the talk page. You do not own the article, and should respect the work of your fellow contributors. Indeed, if you have a conflict of interest, avoid editing the article at all. Instead propose changes here using the {{request edit}} template. --Worldbruce (talk) 04:37, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

"The recently added criminal reports as we can follow the references, is not appropriate the content and title, and does not mirror the reality..." - Although poorly-worded, this reads like a threat of legal action and is completely inappropriate. As discussed above, raise your concerns here, rather than just deleting material you don't like. KJP1 (talk) 08:23, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

New editor

Celal1453 - Please don't remove sourced material and add unsourced material as you tried to do earlier. The page is not an advert for the school, and the school doesn't get to chose what appears. Also, if you have a connection to the school, you need to declare it. KJP1 (talk) 11:18, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Further attempts to remove sourced material

Three attempts yesterday to remove the material on Nibras Islam. Almost certainly connected to the school. I think it may be necessary to give this page some protection. KJP1 (talk) 06:07, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Now protected, with thanks. KJP1 (talk) 12:48, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

alumnus Nibras Islam

The former student's involvement in the July 2016 Dhaka attack had nothing to do with the school, thus the only reason he is being mentioned in this article is because of his supposed notability; however, he has no Wikipedia article to show his notability. The Dhaka attack is notable, but that is not sufficient in and of itself to show that people involved are notable (see WP:BLP1E). If editors think there is sufficient coverage about Nibras Islam to show that he is notable then WP:WTAF. And by the way, of the five references in that material, two are dead and one does not even mention him by name. Meters (talk) 21:16, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. The inclusion of the name is so tenuously related to the school itself, it should not be included here. It's WP:UNDUE.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:40, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

My mistake, I reread the refs and the one that I though did not name him does actually do so. If we do keep this we should update to better, more recent refs though. Two of the refs only name him by referring to social media posts that contradicted the names released by the police. :::Meters (talk) 00:53, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

A few points - first, the information is verifiable to multiple RS. So there isn’t any dispute that Nibras Islam did attend IHSB and was one of the 2016 attackers. Second, it’s worth noting though not determinative, the multiple previous attempts to remove mention of Islam, all by editors with COIs to the school. As to why, in my view, it warrants inclusion, this relates to the motivations and backgrounds of the attackers. The fact that they all came from well-off families and received privileged, private educations was a notable feature of the coverage of the attack, discussed in multiple sources, e.g [1], [2], [3]. The extent to which they were directed/motivated by Isis, or were “home-grown” Islamic terrorists was, and remains, a central feature of the coverage - see, for example, coverage of the 2019 trial, [4], or [5], [6]. So what you have is a single mention of one former pupil of the school, in the article about the school. I’ve carefully re-read UNDUE, and I disagree with the interpretation above - if half the article were about Islam, it would be a valid criticism, but it isn’t. And I certainly don’t think the link between Islam and the school remotely tenuous - he was educated there. Thanks for opening up the discussion; it gives the opportunity to try and establish a consensus. KJP1 (talk) 05:41, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Removed again. It's been more than two weeks and only KJP1 supports treating this alumnus as an exception to the normal treatment of alumni in school articles. Meters (talk) 05:20, 10 June 2022 (UTC)