The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Delete. A redirect to Military of Bangladesh as a plausible search term seems appropriate, and I will create such a redirect after deletion.--Kubigula (talk) 03:35, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bangladesh Forces[edit]

Bangladesh Forces (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Pretty much a hoax. There's no such thing as a Bangladesh Forces as presented in the article. Bangladesh Army, Bangladesh Navy and Bangladesh Air Force are called Bangladesh Forces, of course, just like any other military force in the world. Also the first of Bangladesh forces, the Mukti Bahini is called by that name, like all other military forces from Bangladesh. A pretty generic name, not an official designation, and obviously not material for an encyclopedic entry. Clearly violates WP:OR and WP:SOAP. Aditya(talkcontribs) 08:18, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After analyzing a bit a Merge with Military of Bangladesh seems to make more sense. Some part of the current article may be retained as a "History" section under Military of Bangladesh. Arman (Talk) 08:17, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
After analyzing the article and its talk page, as well as Help:Merging and moving pages and other policy pages, it looks like a good idea to delete this article and incorporate any redeemable information, as in supported by secondary sources in publication, into relevant articles (which may include the military of Bangladesh article but need not to stick to exclusively). Aditya(talkcontribs) 13:10, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There's nothing to merge or redirect. Every last bit of reliable and credible information in the article already is included in the articles you suggest. Threst of the article has not an aorta of credibility, has zero support from published documents and is very much a hoax. On top of that this term, Bangladesh Forces, has no existence as an official/formal boy/term. According to WP:NOTDICDEF, this entry shouldn't even exist as a popular term for Bangladesh Military (in Wiktionary may be, but not here). There's nothing to merge or redirect. Aditya(talkcontribs) 11:24, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will concede that there may be nothing to merge. However, "Bangladesh Forces" is a generic term that is used (correctly or incorrectly) to refer to the Bangladeshi military of the present (current Army, Navy, Airforce) and the past (the Mukti Bahini). By redirecting to Military of Bangladesh, people using this generic term (correctly or incorrectly) will be taken to where they can find the information they want. -- saberwyn 11:38, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmmmmmm... good point. Shall I go forward with the last suggestion (redirecting to Bangladesh Military)? Aditya(talkcontribs) 11:43, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It can wait until the end of the discussion. -- saberwyn 07:22, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for quoting from the Mukti Bahini article. But, I am sure that you realize - the armed forces of Bangladesh was never officially called Bangladesh forces. It is just a general term to connote all forms of Bangladesh military forces according to the context. What you perhaps do not realize is that Indian National Army or the Azad Hind Fauz was identified by that name by both the members and command of that Army, as well as numerous other bodies, inclduing their friends and enemies. The same cannot be said of Bangladesh Forces. Aditya(talkcontribs) 18:50, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have also reviewed the TalkPage of User:Murad_Kahn and most of his edits. He may not play by Wiki rules <understatement> :-) but he knows his subject and his (unsourced) opinions should be taken into account given the hostility of a cabal (events of Sept 2007) formed against him. I also see that nobody is taking offence to the usage of the term Bangladesh Armed Forces on many BD-1971 pages, so this article could be a Rename/Move considering that the term Bangladesh Armed Forces is a generic and not limited only to BD Army/Navy/AF but also paramilitaries like BD Rifles etc. Annette46 (talk) 11:56, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The use of the words cabal and offense are both interesting and worth noting. The former looks like a deliberate slander, the latter may be addressed here. Perhaps you wanted to mean that no one is "objecting" to the use of Bangladesh Armed Forces. But, does that really mean anything? No one is objecting to the use of "US Forces" in various articles (see: Iraq War, Enduring Freedom - Abuses by US Forces in Afghanistan and more), but the article on US military is titled Military of the United States which is pretty much an official designation, and is recognized as so. Try the find the US Forces and you'll be redirected to 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.
So which article do you want this to redirect to? Mukti bahini? Military of Bangladesh? Bangladesh Army/Navy/Air Force? It can't possibly redirect all of them, and a redirect page would probably be equally useless (unless we plan to create disambiguation pages for every misconception in thw world). Finally, please, note that using inconsistencies in the Wikipedia is really not an argument. It only shows where we need to iron out the inconsistencies. Aditya(talkcontribs) 18:40, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't gone through the user's historical edits but Wikipedia is not a place for giving one's own opinions (whether the editor is knowledgable or not) especially if they are unsourced. → AA (talk) — 09:29, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not much difficult when you consider that it's just a common noun that denotes "all" Bangladeshi forces and has no official status as a term. The article in its current form says it's an alternative term for Mukti Bahini, which seemingly is a pure hoax, unsupported by any published source. Aditya(talkcontribs) 14:13, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.