Talk:Sheikh Mujibur Rahman/Archive 1

Archive 1

Being the first president

I have reasons to believe he has been credited as the first president of Pakistan incorrectly. Please check the following link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Presidents_of_Bangladesh which correctly states the names of the Presidents of Bangladesh. Tnx.

202.84.45.228 (talk) 18:00, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Images

A lot of images and information on Mujib are available here. As noted by Rama's arrow, the pre-1956 images are in Public domain according to the copyright laws of Pakistan. --Ragib 06:32, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

• Further references: http://www.nybangla.com/15%20August/Main%20Page.htm has a lot of information, including text/image of the indemnity ordinance, the interview of Major Faruque and Rashid. A lot of it is in Bengali, but Shmitra and I can help with any translation. Thanks. --Ragib 06:38, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

AL economics

"He remains the paramount icon of the Awami League, which continues to profess Rahman's ideals of socialism."

As best as I can remember, the Awami League officially embraced market economics sometime in the 1990s. So the above statement may be incorrect.. any way of verifying? --Peripatetic 18:19, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Well it has become a sorta socialist in name with limited support of free-markets. Its not like a communist party, and more like the Indian National Congress, in which it maintains socialism as one its key ideals. It is a left-wing party. This Fire Burns.....Always 19:41, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

President for life

I thought the 4th amendment had a provision that declared this verbatim, but now I'm confused whether it did it in the text. Of course, the effect was to make Mujib president for life, but the amendment itself may not have said so in text.

From http://banglapedia.search.com.bd/HT/C_0336.htm

"Fourth Amendment Act The Constitution (Fourth Amendment) Act 1975 was passed on 25 January 1975. Major changes were brought into the constitution by this amendment. The presidential form of government was introduced in place of the parliamentary system; a one-party system in place of a multi-party system was introduced; the powers of the jatiya sangsad were curtailed; the Judiciary lost much of its independence; the supreme court was deprived of its jurisdiction over the protection and enforcement of fundamental rights. This Act (i) amended articles 11, 66, 67, 72, 74, 76, 80, 88, 95, 98, 109, 116, 117, 119, 122, 123, 141A, 147 and 148 of the constitution; (ii) substituted Articles 44, 70, 102, 115 and 124 of the constitution; (iii) amended part III of the constitution out of existence; (iv) altered the Third and Fourth Schedule; (v) extended the term of the first Jatiya Sangsad; (vi) made special provisions relating to the office of the president and its incumbent; (vii) inserted a new part, ie part VIA in the constitution and (viii) inserted articles 73A and 116A in the constitution."

So, does anyone have a reference to the sentence? I know it must be and probably IS 100% true, but a reference might help. --Ragib 20:54, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Main page nom

I think this can be nominated for 15 August, his 31st assassination anniversary. --Ragib 03:30, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh hell no! As much as I'm a Wikipedian, that date has gotta have an article on India! Hehehee...This Fire Burns Always 03:32, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Congrats! to This Fire Burns Always and all other editors. Great work--ppm 15:15, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Criticism of the Sheikh

It seems to me that someone hostile to Sheikh Mujib wrote the crticisms part. Calling him a rabble rouse and inept at leadership while not providing a link. Did a Paki write this? The links pointed to don't work....must be moved. Please rectify else I might add a POV tag.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.74.41.206 (talk • contribs)

What exactly is the problem? The links provided here work perfectly. Look at the references. The section you question does not provide any opinion, rather states what some historians opine, with references. Be specific in your comments. Thank you. --Ragib 21:50, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Hostile pov

I would like to know why so many criticisms of this dude (very pov eg. 'rabble rouser') while the links which apparantly evidence this lead one to nowhere! Is this article being changed by a Pakistani? lol (Plz answer). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.74.41.206 (talk • contribs)

The article doesn't criticize, rather points out the opinion of some historians. If you can't find the references at the end of the article, I'd request you to look again. The quote in question has been backed by the reference: "Bangladesh in 1975: The Fall of the Mujib Regime and Its Aftermath, Talukder Maniruzzaman, Asian Survey, Vol. 16, No. 2, A Survey of Asia in 1975: Part II (Feb., 1976), pp. 119-129". It IS shown at the references section. Also, please refrain from making comments on any editors or any nationales, rather comment on content. Thank you. --Ragib 22:15, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

guerrilla

"Mujib was arrested and a guerrilla war erupted between government forces and Bengali nationalists."-- the government forces weren't fighting a guerrila war--ppm 20:59, 9 February 2007 (UTC) UTC)

Picture Caption

Rahman's portrait in the start was captioned "GAY, GAY, GAY" for some reason. I've changed it to his full name.Zainub 12:18, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Good, some one's edited it before I could.Zainub 12:19, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Can someone thank me for my fabulous job with the article. Wheeeee. Zamkudi 12:59, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

All you did was fix some minor errors. You should be thanking Ragib and Rama's Arrow. 70.113.74.80 16:31, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Assassination

The source has been already provided as an Embedded HTML link in the article. Please discuss on the talk page before reverting edits. "The previous version was better" is not a reasonable explanation. In fact, the link you provided is not even working, how can it be better? You should go ahead and fix your link first. 76.185.251.116 08:53, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Addition as a Pakistani politican

I added Sheikh Mujib-Ur-Rahman to the category of Pakistani politicians,Shehzadashiq 16:57, 29 June 2007 (UTC) however Nahid has reverted it. Is there any reason why? Sheikh Mujib won the 1970 elections from Pakistan and was thus eligible for being Pakistan's prime minister. His contribution to Pakistan politics is undeniable so why not acknowledge him as a Pakistani politician as well? I don't see any contradiction in his having been a Pakistani politician and Bangladesh's founding leader.

In case there is a doubt, the Pakistani politicans category does not need to include current politicians, it can also include previous Pakistani politicians. I hope this helps. Please let me know if you are happy with his addition to this category.Shehzadashiq 10:19, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Bangla spelling of Bangabandhu

Could someone please provide the Bangla spelling of Bangabandhu please. I cannot read Bangla so cannot add it myself.Shehzadashiq 16:52, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Urdu spelling removal

Ragib, was there any specific reason why the Urdu spelling of Mujib's name was removed?

Yes, why Urdu? Was Urdu his mother tongue? Was Urdu the language of his region? In Bio pages, if we are to include any non-English script, ONLY the native language of the person should be considered. --Ragib 17:01, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I didn't know that only the mother tongue of a person is to be added. If we look at Gandhi, he has his name mentioned in both Gujarati and Hindi. Now Gandhi's mother tongue was Gujarati, not Hindi. I let you decide if Urdu should be added back, just let me know what you decide.Shehzadashiq 19:42, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but then Gandhi used Hindi almost exclusively in his speeches, books etc. Now, how is Urdu related to Mujibur Rahman? Did he speak Urdu as his mother tongue, or first language? Nope. So, no justification for Urdu. As a counter example, what do you think about having Bengali script in the pages of Jinnah, Bhutto, Ayub Khan and any living or deceased Pakistani politician born before 1971? After all, Bengali WAS one of the two state languages of undivided Pakistan. I hope you see the fallacy in your argument by now. --Ragib 20:09, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I see your point that Urdu was his secondary language and thus makes little sense to add it. Fair enough no argument. However I disagree that Bengali should not be added to the pages of Jinnah, Fatima Jinnah, Iqbal etc. I personally believe that those pages should have Bengali. If you don't mind provide me with the Bengali script in unicode format and I will be more than happy to amend them. Wassallam.Shehzadashiq 13:41, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Ragib will you kindly provide the Bengali script for the people mentioned above? Shehzadashiq 13:29, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Explaining a revert

I reverted the following edit: [1]. This is because of the following reasons:

• The edit blanked a reference ... I don't see any explanation for this arbitrary blanking.
• No need to have the Bengali script for "Bangabandhu".
• During the FAC or peer review (forgot which one), it was pointed out that the "life long president" wasn't backed by any citations.
• Too much details, non-standard date formats, etc. in the intro para ... against WP:SUMMARY and WP:DATE
• Bad English ... for example, "Once his Cabinet Minister Khondaker Mostaq Ahmad was made the president of the country by the coup leaders. "
• This whole new para is full POV, "Law and order was largely restored after a coup on 07 November of 1975 that gave control to the army chief Ziaur Rahman. Later, as president Sayem resigned, Ziaur Rahman, then the Chief Martial Law Administrator (CMLA) took over the charge of the country. Not only he successfully restored discipline in the army, he also paved way for re-establishing democracy in the country. First he allowed multi-party politics that was banned by Mujib and then held a parliamentary election in 1979 that restored multi-party parliamentary democracy in the country."

I request the person who is mutilating this Featured article to discuss any changes before making them. This is a featured article, and the hard work of many editors. Please don't blindly undo that. Thanks. --Ragib 09:03, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Again, this edit by Anon/AsimSanyal is full of inaccuaracies, in addition to the above points ...

• Mujib returned to Bangladesh on January 10, 1972, and NOT April 17, 1972.
• "On his return to East Pakistan, " ... the province was actually called East Bengal at that time
• "The two governments remained in close cooperation during Mujib until Mujib's assasination in 1971." - Mujib was actually assassinated in 1975

I find that entire paragraphs have been removed/blanked, and entire citations from Time magazine and other sources blanked without any explanation. I request the anon/User:Asim Sanyal to refrain from defacing this article.

Thanks. --Ragib 12:19, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Correct spelling

If we write Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in Bengali by using "Avro Phonetic" (Bengali version) software, it stands like: শেইখ মুজিবুর রাহমান instead of শেখ মুজিবর রহমান. So, which procedure we should follow?--NAHID 19:08, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Image deleted?

Does anyone know why the image of Mujib was deleted with any reason? It was under a non-free rationale use for the article. Moshin (talk) 17:15, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Father of the Nation

Its written that sheikh mujib "is considered by some" as bangladesh's founding father and i have edited that to "generally considered". Thats outrageous, "some" consider him? The overwhelming majority see him as the founding father of Bangladesh. Even his killers have said that he should be declared the Father of the Nation. Lt Col Khandakar Abdur Rashid, in an interview to channel i in november 2007 that was published in all major newspapers (http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=10738), said he is undoubtedly the father of the nation and that should be declared constitutionally. All political parties, except the BNP (which never publicly stated that he should not) and islamists, consider him the founding father, evn ershad conceded it in december 2008 by calling him jatir pita. Mujib has been voted as the greatest bengali in a 1000 yrs in a BBC poll. So how on earth can he be considered "by some" as the father of the nation. Outrageous!.--ChaudhryAzan (talk) 15:55, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Technically, the "some" is correct. Sheikh Mujib isn't referred to as the father of the nation by right wing politicians, so you can't make a blanket statement about that. --Ragib (talk) 19:46, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Well firstly, the BNP never publicly stated that he is not the father of the nation. Most center-right politicians in Bangladesh acknowledge that he is the founding father. Plus, President Ziaur Rahman, the founder of the center-right in Bangladesh, himself never denied the founding father label of Mujib. He could have removed Mujib's name as the declarer of independence when he changed the constitution in 1979, but Zia didn't do that. By right wing politicians we mean Jamaat and a few other Islamist parties, many of which never supported the independence of Bangladesh and also, cannot be considered to represent a large reflection of the viewpoints of Bangladeshis, that's becuase Jamaat, nor the other Islamist parties, have never been able to garner enough support at the polls and establish themselves as leading political represantitives.

And moreover, the word "some" is very insufficient to represent the views of Bangladeshis. "Many" may be a more suitable term to use but then again, because most political parties, with the exception of the political right (which is not a substantial political force), have never denied Mujib being the founder and in most cases, they have accepted him as the founder. And as political parties are expected, by their very definition, to represent the views of the majority of people, therefore the views of major political parties can be considered as the general views of the people.--ChaudhryAzan (talk) 07:41, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

ChaudhryAzan is right.The word "some" is very insufficient. Its an established fact that most Bangladeshis consider Mujib as the Father of the Nation. The "some" Ragib talks about is a small minority in Bangladesh. No offence to User:Ragib but it seems to me that he is either very misinformed about his country or he himself subscribes to the rightist mindset in Bangladesh and if that is true, how on earth can a politically biased person become a neutral administrator in wikipedia? Because no one other than the Bangladeshi rightist would say that Mujib is not the founding father or that "some" consider him as the founding father.--122.144.10.15 (talk) 06:57, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks dear anon IP 122.144.10.15. NPOV is one of the core policies of Wikipedia, and everything in Wikipedia needs to abide by that. So, no matter of labeling of my (imaginary) leanings would allow you to overrule that policy. In the mean time, I would openly request you to find more (imaginary) leanings I might have ... it is from anon users' comments like yours that I've learned many such traits about myself (such as leftist, awamist, rightist, anti-India, pro-India, anti-Pakistan, anti-Rohingya, pro-Rohingya ...), so anything new you can come up with would be yet another feather in my cap :) . --Ragib (talk) 19:47, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

who was his bodygaurd Sayed mahamud (talk) 09:46, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Great shortcomings

After giving a thorough reading of this article, as a person who has keenly learnt about the history of contemporary Bangladesh, I am shocked to see so many contradictions and lack of proper history.

I just edited the 1970 elections section. Here i see that its written that sheikh mujib's trial was a criminal court case in which the findings have never been made public! Go the profile of Rahimuddin Khan, and even there its written it was an army court martial that sentenced mujib to death. The Hamedoor Rahman Commission report was published in 2002 where it was clearly written that he was sentenced to death by rahimuddin khan. And even in the intro, its written that he was sentenced to death.

Then theres the issue of the release and return of mujib. Every god damn person in bangladesh knows that he was released and flown to london where he gave a huge press conference to the international media and met British PM Edward Heath. Heath then gave him a Royal Air Force jet to fly back to Dhaka. While on his way back he made it a point to stopover at Delhi where he was greeted by the entire indian cabinet and the president, who broke protocol by even going to the airport. Just to reiterate, all this was recently aired in a special and independently made documentary by the Bangladeshi TV channel ATN Bangla showcasing all these events. How can anyone who wants to share the true history write the section like this??? Why wasant the stay in London, such a historic stay, elaborated here???

And who and what the hell is this Katherine Frank and her god damn book??? She has given so much distorted facts in that book thats been used as a reference here. Indira Gandhi never came to Dhaka on Janurary 10th, 1971! Mujib did on a RAF jet from Delhi where he met gandhi! I mean go an read Bangladesh: A Legacy of Blood by Anthony Anthony Mascarenhas, not these god forsaken distorted history books.

Bangladesh has developed a culture of suppressing and eliminating the true history because of simply political leanings. We Bangladeshis know that very well. and sadly many of the new generation lack the basic knowledge of those days. We dont acknowledge neither Mujib nor Ziaur Rahman for their great leadership and rather we suppress the truth so much, its hard for them to see the two greats in any positive light.

It seems sadly, very sadly, this culture has come to wikipedia as well. How sad.

Bangladeshi wikipedians, we all know Mujib and Zia had great flaws, whether those are entirely their fault is still up for debate. But their legacy concerning their greatness has been established. Mujib is the great founder and Zia is a great leader. And the same goes for so many great leaders around the world. Look at Ataturk or Jinnah's article in wikipedia. So much of elaboration and correct facts. And look at our founder's article as well as that of Zia. Its a big shame. --ChaudhryAzan (talk) 16:11, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Instead of getting too emotional, and disparaging others, why don't you dig up some references and fix all these issues? That will help this article get improved. It used to be one of the featured articles of WP, and had even appeared on main page, but due to reference issues,it got demoted. So, perhaps with your attention, it can be made better. (The Zia article also got demoted for the same reason). --Ragib (talk) 19:41, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I also notice that you have blanked several references. Unless you put back other references from reliable sources, I will be forced to undo your blanking. You cannot simply remove referenced information ... please back up your latest edits with a citation. --Ragib (talk) 19:45, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

President for Life

The claim that Mujib declared himself as President of Bangladesh for life or President has never been confirmed. And this article contains no single or credible reference that Mujib declared himself President for Life. No single official Bangladeshi government states that he was actually declared President for Life.

BUT, there is no doubt he did declare himself President of Life for something. He was declared President for Life of Bangladesh Krishak Sramik Awami League or BAKSAL. But technically, despite Bangladesh being a one party state, the President of Bangladesh does not necessarily need to be the President of BAKSAL (like the President of China does not necessarily have to be Chairman of the Communist Party).

As for the national presidency, Mujib extended the term of the President from five to seven years and the subsequent presidential elections under the constitution of 1975, were to be held in 1983. Thus, Mujib was not President for Life of Bangladesh, but of BAKSAL.--122.144.10.15 (talk) 10:11, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

The decleration of independence

The decleration of independence was not given directly by Bangabandhu Mujibur Rahman.It was given by Major Ziaur Rahman on behalf of Bangabandhu from Kalurhat Radio Station in Chittagong on the night of 26 March, 1971. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Templarz (talk • contribs) 21:03, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Please take a look at the three references. Bangladesh's high court declared that Sheikh Mujibur Rahman proclaimed independence on 26th March, 1971. One reference even shows a disclosed US government document proving it.

As for Zia, his declaration was the third and last in a series of declarations. The first was by Mujib, the second by M A Hannan in Chittagong. Both could not be transmitted widely. Mujib's one went only as far as the Buriganga River. Zia's one however was picked up a Australian ship anchored in Chittagong port and then transmitted around the world.--202.191.127.38 (talk) 12:32, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Please read Newspaper of 1971. New York Times 27 March 1971 Times 27 March 1971 Weekly Time Magazine USA 05 April 1971 Times of India 27 March 1971 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bangla1971 (talk • contribs) 03:26, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

"Seikhdome"

The Baksal section mentioned that Bangladesh was turned into a "Seikhdome" during Mujib's rule. The reference is taken from www.majordalimbu.com. Major Dalim is one of the convicted (and fugitive) killers of Sheikh Mujib. How can information from the personal website of the convicted killer of the man who is the subject of this article be considered as a reliable source? Wikipedia administrators should have taken note of this since this is a very important article. Given the lack of internet profiles on Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, it can be said that the wikipedia article is perhaps the most viewed profile of Sheikh Mujib on the web. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.221.0.2 (talk) 20:10, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 6 October 2011

His mother's name is not mentioned. To my understanding his mother's name is important as in Bangladesh in a passport you are now supposed to have both father's and mother's name. Please insert his mother's name.

130.194.78.169 (talk) 23:13, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a source for his mother's name? --Jnorton7558 (talk) 23:31, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Bangabandhu Online Museum bangabandhu.net (pls visit albd.org to verify link)

• Bangabandhu Online Museum

Abdullah Harun 06:12, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Is there a valid reason to add this link to the page? --Jnorton7558 (talk) 22:17, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

http://bangabandhu.net

The link of Bangabandhu Online Museum is verily valid. In fact as an authorized portal it deserves a not only link but also a page named after it. Link of agriculture university is valid but the largest source of info on sheikh mujib is not valid! Strange! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bangladeshbuzz (talk • contribs) 08:16, 27 June 2012 (UTC)--Bangladeshbuzz (talk) 08:20, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Aided by India?

I question the statement "During his nine month detention, guerrilla war erupted between government forces and Bengali nationalists aided by India". What is the assertion, that India aided the guerrilla war, based on? And what does the phrase "aided by India" bring to Mujibur Rehman's story? Is the implication that he was India's man? That is certainly not true. I think the phrase is an example of superfluous verbiage that comes from the writer's own biases and has nothing to do with the subject. PLEASE TAKE THE PHRASE OUT. Sooku (talk) 18:04, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

East Bengal during the Dominion of Pakistan (1947-1955)

There was already a discussion on the talk page of the Bangladesh Liberation War article and on a user talk page. The region that is now Bangladesh was named East Bengal as part of the Dominion of Pakistan, one of its 5 provinces, both existing from the creation of the dominion until the creation of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan in 1956, when East Bengal was renamed East Pakistan, and implementation of One Unit, the merging of the four other provinces as West Pakistan (the Liberation War article notes though that the western region was popularly (by which communities though?) called West Pakistan collectively during the dominion).

So it must be remembered then that when references are made to the region that is now Bangladesh during when it was a province of the Dominion of Pakistan, it is mentioned as "East Bengal," and notes that it was renamed East Pakistan when the IRoP was created, in 1956, so as not to confuse readers about the change in name or use of two names. I guess it will be a bit tricky for readers. But it's the job of editors to make sure the change of name is clear. Otherwise, as it was previously, using East Pakistan when the region was part of the dominion is factually incorrect.

Since Sheikh Mujib rose to prominence when the Awami League was created, during East Bengal, that instead of East Pakistan should be mentioned in the introduction. It's also an ideal place to mention the change of name. But I think it will be helpful for readers to mention the name change in later parts of the article too. --Fmqtr3754 (talk)

Full of bias, inaccuracy and partisan viewpoints

Seriously, references like Amar Desh and unknown self proclaimed historians cannot be credible. This article should be thoroughly reviewed and re-written by independent experts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.221.0.2 (talk) 17:03, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

About the hunger in 1974.

I'm quoting: "In 1974, Bangladesh experienced the deadliest famine ever, which killed around 1.5 million Bangladeshi people from hunger" And a few lines below: "During the famine, 70000 people were reported as dead.[25]"

Where's true? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iich1960 (talk • contribs) 21:03, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Sheikh Mujib

Wikis infomation is a complex one.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.40.190.146 (talk) 14:50, 18 April 2014 (UTC) 

Semi-protected edit request on 2 February 2015

2A02:908:F433:FD00:F41B:D6A5:4563:B98E (talk) 22:29, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 22:30, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

"Following the declaration of Muhammad Ali Jinnah and the province chief minister Khwaja Nazimuddin in 1948 that the people of East Bengal would have to adopt Urdu as the state language, protests broke out amongst the population." (last paragraph of Early Life), what is meant by that? There never was "East Bengal" in the picture. Please rectify the mistake as soon as possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.177.129.95 (talk) 19:52, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 May 2015

Sabbirazim (talk) 03:47, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

 Not done No request submitted. - Arr4 (talk) 05:52, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Details of Sheikh Mujib's trial in Lyallpur, now Faisalabad, was first published in the Washington Post on August 3, 1971. The report under the title "Bangladesh leader being tried in Pakistan" said that the charge against Mujib was "Waging war against the state." It also said that Mr A K Brohi, a leading lawyer of Pakistan, was representing the Bangladesh leader.

Among others three Bengali journalists, Golam Rasul Mullick of ENA, Shahidul Haq of Morning News and Mozammel Haq of APP, were produced as witnesses. Rasul denounced the proceedings and went into hiding soon after but the other two corroborated the Pakistani point of view.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130305163532/http://www.akhonsamoy.com:80/back/Vol10/102/pages/Page_01.htm to http://www.akhonsamoy.com/back/Vol10/102/pages/Page_01.htm

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:42, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Archive 1