Talk:Delwar Hossain Sayeedi

Untitled

this is a distortion image of mr delwar hossain sayeedi. as a bangladeshi we know that mr sayeedi is the most popular religious leader of bangladesh. because of his effective speeches so many people are becoming good muslim. the anti islamic group are trying to make a bad potrait of him.

One cannot assume virtue from popularity. Tanzeel 14:58, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

• 3 million Bangladeshis were killed ,10,000 illegitimate child were born , wasn't sayeedi part of this?
• Tanzeel , how would u feel if ur parents were killed by Razakars??? how would u feel if u were one of those illegitimate bastard?????????? would u still talk in favor of saitan sayeedi ?????????????

Only idiots can accept that 3 million people were killed during the liberation war. We do not have verifiable records of even 30 thousand people. Even if you accept the lies, what does it have to do with an innocent man being convicted by a kangaroo court in Bangladesh? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.227.116.99 (talk) 16:30, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedians must have neutral tone, and nuetral point of view. But political bickering only makes memes instead. Please compli with Wikipedia policy and leave your bias at the dias of of your political gods and goddesses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.148.35.65 (talk) 08:25, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Allama Sayeedi is a Politician

How will u prove that he was a razakar?? read his books,listen to his audio,video cds u will get your answers.......please dont be stupid....stop talking/writing /taking decision without thinking....most of us take decisions without thinking ...why dont u think everything UNBIASEDly?? It is true that sufferer has to have pain. But those who did not do the similar crime should not be punished for political reason. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.102.36.2 (talk) 14:18, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Reference added...--Sabih Omar 16:08, 13 February 2013 (UTC)Sabih Omar

Confusion in Delwar Hossain Sayeedi's Background

I am confused about the ‘Background’ part of this article. The ‘Background’ part of this article is almost a copy-paste from this link:

[1]

But the author did not provide this source in the article. What the author gave in the article (two links in ‘External Links’) does not provide us the information given in the ‘Background’. Even the second link in ‘External Links’ does not work at all. What it informs about sayeedi? That, Sayeedi was born into a "prominent business and Zamindar family", “into a Syed family tracing their roots back to Imam Ali, “ and “his family was prominent as spiritual and religious leaders in Sylhet District” and “Sayeedi completed his religious education at the Binori Town Madrassa in Karachi , Pakistan. He is fluent in Urdu , Bengali , Arabic , English and Punjabi.” But does the link provide a reliable source so that wikipedia can store its content ?? Look, ‘’He was born into a Syed family tracing their roots back to Imam Ali’’ – this is self-proclaimed by Sayeedi. Now, follow this link :

[2]

The article (found by following the second link) claims totally a different type of statement about Sayeedi’s ‘Background’. Now, does this link provide a reliable source so that wikipedia can store its content ?? If so, then the content of this article can be used. If not, the content can be ignored. Now, if any of these links provide a reliable source so that wikipedia can store any of its content ?? If not, then shouldn’t the texts (under ‘Background’) be deleted ? Or replaced by some other statements found from a reliable source ? So, what is the correct step that we should take for the ‘Background’ part? NasrinatWiki (talk) 14:35, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

This article contains 90% wrong data. I am 100% sure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SHAIKH NOOR-E-ALAM (talk • contribs) 14:38, 2 August 2010 (UTC) This article is biased and intended to destroy the truth. The writer thinks that he will establish the wrong. But people will look for the answer of following questions: 1. His father's name is Yusuf Saydee. Normally son bears the title of father.How can the son be addressed as "Sider"? 2. Someone may say that he himself has put the title "Saydee" with his own name. Then who put the title of his father? 3. As a boy his Dakhis final certificate provides the information that his father was Yusuf Saydee. Is it justified to say that he has taken own title? 4. He opposed the Kudrat-e-Khuda education policy of Bangladesh. It was also opposed by many people in Bangladesh. Are all razakers? 5. He opposed the US attack on Afganistan and Iraq. Many people did it. Are all razakers? 6. He established a modern Madrasha. Is it a anti social work? I would like to humbly request the honest people to find out the truth. Please find out the truth. Please ask yourself what is really true and what is false.

4. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.92.226.15 (talk) 03:14, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

BLP Concern

This article is seriously biased. Some of previous editors tried to blame International Crimes Tribunal instead of providing Sayeedi's information.--Freemesm (talk) 14:10, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Source doesn't state anything about the info in "Background" section

Here in "Background" section http://jamaat-e-islami.org/index.php?option=com_popup_org&Sub_Menu=PR&Info_Id=17 this web page is linked as source. But that doesn't state anything about the statements.--Freemesm (talk) 15:44, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Phone Controversy

How is this a reliable source? It quotes Wiki for gods sake. It is just a rumour according to the link and has no place here so I am removing it. Darkness Shines (talk) 23:08, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

You're right, it's a pretty bad source. Applesandapples (talk) 16:20, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

War crime charges in Controversy section

The war crime charges needs to be moved from controversy section since International Crime Tribunal (Bangladesh) has declared verdict on 28 February 2013 . He was proven guilty and given the death sentence. Also, more information on the trials and verdict needs to be added. --Shantonu.hossain

I agree, more info needs to be added. However, being sentenced by the ICT does not qualify as proof of guilt, because of the tribunal's major problems and allegations of government involvement. [3] [4] [5] Applesandapples (talk) 16:20, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

References

Birth

Was he born in 1940 or 1952? I'm seeing two different dates in the same article. When I tried to edit the article, I saw another date (1955) in the "Persondata" template. The Bengali language version of the article says 1940. I know that the vast majority of dates of birth in Bangladesh from older people are missing, but this is ridiculous. InMooseWeTrust (talk) 11:30, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

This happens to be a discussion point, whether he is in his sixties and too young during the 1971 revolution inorder to have made a significant impact. The dates need to be correct, and this is difficult due to Bangladesh's poor birth records. Kuiper3 (talk) 18:19, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Convictions

There seems to be sincere disagreement amongst many regarding his past, his participations, his influences, etc.. However, what should be the primary concern is "was he or was he not convicted of crimes for his actions." The remainder can be debated without wondering over "bias" concerning his criminal activity, as the conviction(s) for crime(s) speak for themselves. Should those convictions be overturned, the debate can resume on questions in that regard. However, as a convicted criminal, the standard for those with sentiment concerning his behaviors otherwise becomes a burden to displace. I am open to information, as I am not perfect, and I do not wish to embroil anyone with fervent opinion Barada wha? 00:49, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Given the myriad of problems with the trial process in the ICT [6] [7] [8], it is too POV to call him a "convicted criminal" in the intro. Also, "convicted criminal" does sound like there has been conclusive proof of crimes, but I haven't seen any sources which prove so. The allegations are so serious that a modern source from a newspaper favourable towards the ICT such as The Daily Star really doesn't serve as a reliable source. Therefore, calling him a criminal is flirting with violation of Wikipedia:BLP...but saying that he has been convicted is more neutral. Applesandapples (talk) 14:45, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

We use what the sources say, and every source calls him a convicted war criminal. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Dear Apple Lover, actually wikipedia is not a place for promoting own view. It will represent that, which all the reliable source say. If you check carefully, this article contains lots of news sources, which are not Daily Star. Moreover Daily Star is most popular daily in Bangladesh. You can't just say "Daily Star is Biased Source and so this article is also biased". I'm not quoting few specific news sources, as a lot of reliable source are given to the main article. If any one has doubt about any specific source, then please challenge it. Our main objective should be making informative and reliable decent article rather than biasing it.--Freemesm (talk) 08:01, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I can and I will say that the Daily Star is a biased source and so their articles are biased enough not to take its word for it when it comes to very serious BLP issues. I'll provide some examples to back this up, if you like. Also, I think there is a difference between being convicted of war crimes and being a convicted war criminal...the wording of the latter really does skew the POV. Can you find those exact words in any decent source? It's certainly not there in the BBC one. Applesandapples (talk) 09:07, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Indeed: there's also a difference between describing and explaining that someone has been convicted of something by a tribunal (and a tribunal about which doubts have been expressed) – which is already reflected in the lead – and also simply slapping the label "war criminal" on them in the very first sentence. And in fact, as ever, two of three cites (the Star and the Guardian) supposedly backing this up say nothing about him being a "war criminal" anyway or even about his conviction – not least because they pre-date his conviction. As for sources more generally, virtually no non-blog websites revealed by a quick Google search seem to apply this explicit label to him, hence we shouldn't either, even if someone can dig up one or two that happen to. This is a BLP which is linked from the news section of the main page, after all. N-HH talk/edits 12:38, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

You may say Daily Star is biased news source, but you must prove it to state that in wikipedia. Another point is the word War Criminal. The lead on BBC said

A tribunal in Bangladesh has sentenced Islamist leader Delwar Hossain Sayeedi to death for crimes committed during the country's 1971 war of independence.

Does not it mean that, he is convicted as war criminal? Does not murder, torture and rape in war is taken as war crime?--Freemesm (talk) 13:53, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

May I know what is the difference between "being convicted of war crimes" and "being a convicted war criminal", as Applesandapples suggests above? Criminal is the noun form of the verb crime.

BBC source says that this person was sentenced to death due to the crimes committed during and related to the war. What else is needed? Moreover, to balance this, it has been mentioned that the tribunal has been questioned. I feel this quite balanced.--Dwaipayan (talk) 14:06, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

As an outsider, it seems factual to me to state he was convicted of war crimes by the tribunal, which sentenced him to death. Discussions about the tribunal can be added separately, with RS to back up any assertions about it. The article needs more background on the tribunal anyway, to explain how it was established and what it is supposed to do. I tried to add headers so that the article would appear to have more of a standard bio approach. It would be useful to add content about his political career, as well as his earlier life in the 1970s.Parkwells (talk) 15:56, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Parkwells for the edits; the current version looks quite good.--Dwaipayan (talk) 16:04, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Dear Parkwells, If you focus on tribunal rather than focusing on Sayeedi's crimes (which includes war crime and spreading heat speech against non-muslims and journalists.) then this article will fail to describe the actual Sayeedi. Few followers of Sayeedi are trying to do that. You may know that there is another article for the tribunal. That describes everything about the tribunal. This tribunal has both welcomed and criticized by few organization. So putting only negative opinion and then presenting Sayeedi as an angel is not a good idea.--Freemesm (talk) 16:34, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't think anyone's trying to present him as an "angel". In fact, that is setting up a false opposition, as if this is a debate between pro-Sayeedi and anti-Sayeedi editors (I personally have no opinion on the individual); the point is about the fair and objective presentation of information as against loading the text in whatever direction or trying to present him in any particular light, whether good or bad. And yes, there is no literal difference between saying he is "a war criminal" and "has been convicted of war crimes [by one tribunal]" but that is missing the point about the subtlety of language and emphasis. As noted, there is a very big difference between detailing that conviction and its context and slapping the simplistic, two-word label on him in the first sentence as the primary descriptor (I note we seem to be somewhere in the middle currently, with redundant repetition as a bonus). As ever with WP, editing on this page seems to be more about politics than it does about writing an objective and well-written encyclopedia. N-HH talk/edits 10:03, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

• Comment For reference: Examples when using English in translation: Nazi Germany's Kurt Meyer (Panzer corps) was a "war criminal." Albert Speer was "convicted of war crimes." Though each was party to war, one was an overt murderer, and one was a criminal conspirator involved in the implementation of war. Those persons are not in any way analogous to the person whom the article is regarding, but the definitions/applications of the terms are how they "translate" in standard usage and conversation in English. Barada wha? 10:03, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Removal of my edits

I would like to know why Faizan Al-Badri has undone my changes. He has cited the changes as 'mostly crap'. My changes were (in liberation war section) adding contention of Sayeedi defense to make article more balanced (bdnews24 link) and adding (in conviction section) the charges of which Sayeedi was convicted and acquitted. Unless I get a clear and rational explanation as to the 'crap' nature of the changes, I will undo the deletion. Thank you everybody. Husain007 (talk) 02:20, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Factual accuracy disputed

This neutrality-concerned article makes several claims but fails to cite reliable sources in support of this. Some historical information like the birth date, his alleged participation in various activities have just been accommodated without providing any RS. Another concern is it relies heavily on online news items and does not address any published and printed verifiable sources which is generally the accepted norm for WP:BLP related issues. The article should go through a scrutiny. -AsceticRosé 05:57, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Unsourced birth-date and age have been removed as per WP:BLP and WP:RS. Other disputed elements can be checked to comply with the policy of biography of living persons. --AsceticRosé 10:16, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

jamaat-e-islami.org

I do not see how this is RS for anything to do with a member of Jamaat-e-Islami, especially for contentious facts. Thoughts? Darkness Shines (talk) 11:59, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Delwar Hossain Sayeedi/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This piece speaks of an international camapaign against this individual. In fact, the writers of this entry are spearheading that campaign intent on destroying this person's reputation. Whether you it is the Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh or the leaders of this group, there is a systematic attempt to malign a group that has very much signedup to democratic politics. We are using a circutous use of sources -- their Awami League sympathy is the common cause that unites them. This is libellous and any article on the Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh or its sympathisers must be scrutinised for its fairness.

Last edited at 15:47, 29 October 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 13:10, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Delwar Hossain Sayeedi.jpg.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:52, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Delwar Hossain Sayeedi Image2.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:51, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Delwar hossain sayeedi.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:23, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Fail

The article has been failing to meet WP:NEUTRAL, WP:GFCA and WP:NOCRIT over years. Most contents were not published from a neutral point of view. The MOS:OPENPARABIO and lead section had only negative info, thus not meeting Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section. Nothing was represented fairly. Some of the users were not attentive with attributions and did not avoid sections and articles focusing on criticisms or controversies], most descriptions did not fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources as per WP:UNDUE, Balancing aspects neglected, not that much was done protect neutrality and to avoid problems like 'POV forking' as per WP:STRUCTURE. Biased statements of opinion WERE NOT presented only with in-text attribution as per WP:INTEXT etc.

User:GorgeCustersSabre, please keep an eye on the article. Thanks.--208.127.199.117 (talk) 09:44, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

--208.127.199.69 (talk) 09:39, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Necessary to mention?

The below comments were made by some of the head of states and governments and human rights practices. Sources are available. Might be worth including them in the article???

Human rights......all expressed doubts about the justice served up in Bangladesh's court system.

Wikileaks has also gotten into the mix: a leaked cable from the US State Department in November 2010 stated: "There is little doubt that hard-line elements within the ruling party believe that the time is right to crush Jamaat and other Islamic parties."

Pakistan Imran Khan mentioned that the JI leader was innocent and had nothing to do with the charges against him.

Although security forces in Bangladesh have long committed grave human rights abuses, including torture and extrajudicial executions, under previous governments including both the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party and the ruling Awami League, enforced disappearances in particular have become a hallmark of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wazed’s current decade-long rule. When Prime Minister Hasina took office in 2009, there were three reported cases of enforced disappearances. By the next election in January 2014, there had been over 130. In the year ahead of the December 2018 election, there were 98 cases reported.

Erdogan warned that history would not forgive Bangladesh while his deputy Bekir Bozdag said that justice, human rights and the law had been trampled.

In Bangladesh, people who question the government’s increasingly authoritarian rule fear they may be next in line to be killed or forcibly disappeared by security forces. When Human Rights Watch raises this with the Bangladeshi authorities, they are quick to dismiss the reports as lies made up by the political opposition...... Yet extrajudicial killings have become so established in Bangladesh...

In July 2019, following its review of Bangladesh’s record, the UN Committee against Torture noted that “in general, one got the impression that the police, as well as other law enforcement agencies, were able to operate with impunity and zero accountability.” The rights body recommended that the Bangladesh government “establish an independent vetting procedure, with appropriate UN guidance, for all military and police personnel proposed for deployment in UN peace missions and ensure that no person or unit implicated in the commission of torture, extrajudicial killing, disappearances or other serious human rights violations is selected for service.” The committee also said that it is “concerned at reports that personnel that have served with the Rapid Action Battalion have frequently been deployed for service with United Nations peace missions.”

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the government of Newaz Sharif in Pakistan have expressed concerns over the trials on several occasions since 2010.....and blaming the ruling Awami League for political vengeance to wipe out its opposition.

"Significant human rights issues included credible reports of unlawful or arbitrary killings, including extrajudicial killings; forced disappearance; torture or cases of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment by the government or its agents on behalf of the government," said the 2021 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices'

--208.127.199.117 (talk) 09:41, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Disruptive edits by Xkalponik

User:Xkalponik has been removing sourced contents that specifically critises the trial of Delwar Hossain Sayeedi. I have not seen any valid reasons to remove these contents and yet, Xkalponik keeps reverting all the editors who disagree with them. This is surely disruptive and I would suggest them stop before it requires an administrative action. LucrativeOffer (talk) 15:15, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

@Xkalponik@LucrativeOffer please discuss here rathing than reverting each other SpaceExplorer12 (talk) 15:29, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

@SpaceExplorer12, I'm not going to revert anymore edits. I think we've come to resolve this matter. Please see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection/Increase#Delwar_Hossain_Sayeedi . Any further revert is unwarranted here. Even if @LucrativeOffer, reverts again, I will not edit back, until an admin action. They've even removed semi-protection and multiple issues templates. I'm not participating in this mess anymore until admin action. X (talk) 15:42, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Father's name

His father name is ইউসুফ শিকদার[9] Rohanx98 (talk) 18:27, 15 August 2023 (UTC)