Talk:Economy of Bangladesh

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Semi-protected edit request on 30 August 2022[edit]

Need to add the GDP PPP 203.126.228.246 (talk) 11:35, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 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 and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:50, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Bangladesh — Preceding unsigned comment added by DeNeroAl (talkcontribs) 13:23, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gulshan skyline[edit]

@AMomen88: keeps removing the skyline of Gulshan Thana, where most multinational companies have their offices in Dhaka in addition to many Bangladeshi companies. Gulshan is undoubtedly a major business center in Bangladesh. AMomen88 (is he trying to imitate AK Abdul Momen?) keeps inserting images of one or two buildings. Just because the user is prejudiced against Gulshan does not take away the fact that Gulshan is an economic hub of the country. Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 16:02, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Solomon The Magnifico: I do not need to live in Gulshan to know that the image you keep inserting is an exceptionally hideous image of a bunch of derelict apartment blocs. I am not in any way "prejudiced" against Gulshan, I am prejudiced against the monstrosity of an image you keep inserting on the article. The text you keep adding below is verbose and obsolete, follow the example of numerous other economy articles which merely state the name of the financial centre. I recognise you are a novice editor but in future please refrain from making such corrosive edits.–AMomen88 (talk) 16:38, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@AMomen88: Wow, you really don't believe in WP:NOPERSONALATTACKS. Look at the Economy of Turkey which has an image of the Levent business district in Istanbul; or look at Economy of Israel which has an image of the Diamond Exchange District in Ramat Gan. Gulshan in the same vein is the most influential business center in Dhaka and it makes sense for its image to be in the header. Plus, the buildings in my image are not just apartments. It includes the Dhaka Westin and other commercial buildings like Landmark Tower and Doreen Tower. Stop being a monster. Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 16:51, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Solomon The Magnifico: I didn’t insult you personally in anyway at all, I criticised the nature of the images you kept reinserting. There are very few exceptions, virtually all other economy articles have the name of the financial centre and the capital but you are incessant on adding poor quality images of dilapidated blocs. You wrongly accuse me of personal attacks but you end by calling me a “monster” which is a personal attack, clearly you don't believe in WP:NOPERSONALATTACKS. —AMomen88 (talk) 15:41, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
How do you explain this edit of yours then? You initially wanted to insert File:ORION Group constructed the highest building in the country City Centre.jpg. When you revert my edits by falsely calling it vandalism, then I will take that as a personal attack. Your brought up the topic of monstrosity. Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 15:57, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Vinegarymass911:, @Mehediabedin:, @Worldbruce: Please can you help resolve the conflict and prevent further unproductive edit warring. I have proposed the image File:Panthapath.jpg with the text "Dhaka, the financial centre of Bangladesh" whereas @Solomon The Magnifico: has proposed File:Gulshan Avenue.jpg with the text "Gulshan Avenue in Dhaka". Please can you help determine which image and accompanying text is superior. Many thanks–AMomen88 (talk) 15:41, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Vinegarymass911:, @Mehediabedin:, @Worldbruce: The Gulshan Avenue picture is from 2021. AMomen88's picture of Panthapath is from 2016. This article needs to be updated. In economic history, entire sections are copy pasted from other articles. This article seriously needs an update because investors and businesses do actually look at this article to get an overview of Bangladesh. I suggest Momen quit playing games over his perceived superiority/inferiority complexes over an image! Get serious. The article needs work. Also, labelling the Gulshan Avenue image as vandalism (when it is clearly not) can be construed as a personal attack.--Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 15:49, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Vinegarymass911:, @Mehediabedin:, @Worldbruce: There is no requirement for lead images on economy articles to be as recent as 2021. The lead images for the US, India, China, Japan, Germany, the UK, France and South Korea, are all pre-2021 (in Japan and India's case, the images are more than a decade old). The key requirement is that the image is of a high calibre, putting such a poor quality image which denigrates Bangladesh's economy is not beneficial. Solomon The Magnifico is quite disparaging when he trashes the entire article and has a haughty manner, this behaviour is unwelcome and should not be endorsed on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AMomen88 (talkcontribs) 12 November 2022 14:26 (UTC)
@Vinegarymass911:, @Mehediabedin:, @Worldbruce: How on earth is File:Gulshan Avenue.jpg a low quality image? It is a much more high quality image than what AMomen88 wants to put up. Does Abdul Momen know what offices are seen in File:Gulshan Avenue.jpg? I can point out the offices of Citibank, Siemens, and Navana Group etc in my image. File:Gulshan Avenue.jpg has a much higher concentration of commercial buildings than File:Panthapath.jpg. Momen's image, File:Panthapath.jpg, only has two buildings of Bashundhara Group and Unique Group. I rather go with the image of Citibank, Siemens and so many other corporate offices.--Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 16:35, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AMomen88: also, you or any of the editors here are not the arbiters of who gets to edit Wikipedia. Because Wikipedia is a much larger community. If you think only Bangladeshis can edit Bangladesh articles and restrict anyone they perceive as non-Bangladeshi or from a different economic background, then you are wrong.--Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 18:01, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AMomen88: @Solomon The Magnifico: I believe that you both have good intention, but you need to act without words like "the user is prejudiced against Gulshan", "I recognise you are a novice editor", "Stop being a monster" etc. Give respect to the other user even they don't like your edit. @Solomon The Magnifico: what he said is not okay, but that doesn’t mean you can call him "monster" (it is childish and hilarious to call him monster but still not okay). So please refrain yourselves from attack other.

Now about the choice, is puzzling. To me, Gulshan Avenue image is low quality image. The other image has quality but the image AMomen88 proposed that doesn’t show skyline in a large scale, means the image don't portray the heart of economic activity perfectly. That's why I am proposing new photo File:Dhaka April (33244268934).jpg (or alternatively File:Dhaka motijheel skyline.jpg). The image shows skyline of Motijheel Thana and Motijheel is the oldest business district of Dhaka. The photo is good and portray the whole skyline. That's why I think we should use the image. Mehedi Abedin 16:45, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are you kidding me? Look, as AMomen88 points out, most national economy articles point to the main financial centre of a country. Well guess what, Gulshan Avenue hosts branches or head offices of all major banks in Bangladesh. Motijheel does not have as many banks as Gulshan Avenue. In fact, no other area in Bangladesh has as many banks as Gulshan Avenue. I think you both are sadly missing the point on this. The problem is that Dhaka does not have a well defined CBD which leads to confusion. But as far as being a financial center is concerned, nothing beats Gulshan Avenue. Its where all banks (local and foreign) have an office. Its the only place in Bangladesh where one can find all banks along one avenue. Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 09:39, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And I agree with AMomen88. I don't remember that there must be recent photo. But I agree that we should keep new photo in article. But that doesn’t mean that have to be newer (or newest). But there is no requirement for lead images on economy articles that doesn’t mean you can put outdated photo. But If the photo is 5-6 years old that is not a issue. But if we find better photo with quality and context then of course we should use latest photo. But if the latest photo doesn’t satisfy the points mentioned by me, then old photo (like captured 2-5 years ago) is okay. Mehedi Abedin 16:56, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mehediabedin: I think an economy article should reflect the latest economic situation. Gulshan has been an important CBD for more than 10 years. This does not mean Motijheel is any less important. But the Dhaka page on Wikipedia already shows Motijheel prominently. Many of the tall buildings in Motijheel are state-owned companies and agencies, like Bangladesh Bank, Janata Bank, Sonali Bank etc. Gulshan is the hub of the private sector. Moreover, Gulshan Avenue does represent the economic progress of Bangladesh. If you talk to most foreigners who do business with Bangladesh, they often consider Gulshan as a CBD in addition to other places. Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 17:06, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Solomon The Magnifico: Of course we can use photo of Gulshan. But it was actually a "residential area from the start". But that fact doesn’t mean that we can't use photo of Gulshan. But the issue is not the place, but the size, context and quality of the photo. But the photo seems bit off. I think you should provide better photo of the skyline of Gulshan. Now, about Motijheel, the photo of Motijheel we see in the article of Dhaka isn’t the same photo I proposed. Also, Motijheel has offices of many state companies that doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have headquarters of private companies. And the weak aspect of your debate is Gulshan is the hub of only private sector'. That means Gulshan Don't portray public sector. That also means Motijheel portray both public and private sector. If you think that way then you will able to see that the Motijheel photo is better qualified than Gulshan photo (because economy is not only about private sector). But yes, there is an alternative way that we can always use the Gulshan photo in any section in this article and we can use the Motijheel photo in the infobox. But the discussion is happening between us. We are not asking anyone for the suggestion. Maybe more opinion will be beneficial. What do you think @AMomen88:? Mehedi Abedin 13:58, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Mehediabedin: @AMomen88: The image I placed captures the business side of Gulshan Avenue in a great away. The image focuses on the business side, not the residential side. I can see several important buildings in the image, including Navana Tower and Laila Tower (which houses Citibank and Siemens). The private sector makes up 80% of Bangladesh's economy and the public sector makes up 20%. As I said, Gulshan is the largest financial center in Bangladesh because all major banks either have a branch office or head office on Gulshan Avenue itself. All banks do not have an office in Motijheel. It is common knowledge that Gulshan Avenue is a commercial and corporate hub. I think the image is a good portrayal of Bangladesh's economy in the 21st century. Most of the buildings in Motijheel and Kawran Bazaar are from the 20th century! Motijheel does not have a single international hotel chain. Gulshan has at least four (Westin, Sheraton, Four Points, and Renaissance), followed by two in Kawran Bazaar (Pan Pacific and Holiday Inn), one in Ramna (Intercontinental), and one on Airport Road (Radisson). Tells you where most of the business happens doesn't it? Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 14:16, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Even the Dhaka Stock Exchange has left South Dhaka (which covers Motijheel and Kawran Bazaar). The DSE is now in North Dhaka near Gulshan. Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 14:34, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Solomon The Magnifico: Again, the debate is not about the place but about the photo. And the photo isn’t suitable for infobox. So I think you need to propose another better photo of the business district of Gulshan. What about other photos of Gulshan? File:Gulshan 2.jpg, File:Dhaka City Gulshan 12.jpg, File:Dhaka City Gulshan 10.jpg, File:GulshanDhaka.jpg?? They are photos of Gulshan and they are suitable for the infobox. Mehedi Abedin 14:43, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think it isn't suitable? You have to explain please. Is it because of size? A lot of Wikipedia articles are using large size images these days. Look at Mumbai. This discussion is going no where. Its very difficult to improve content when you put up obstacles like this for no reason (and sometimes, for politically-motivated reasons). Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 14:51, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Solomon The Magnifico: Politically motivated reason? Excuse me but you can't accuse anyone for anything without valid reason. You did this before. You accuse AMomen88 by telling he "prejudiced against Gulshan" but you didn’t provide valid proof for your claim. It isn’t' obstacles by me, but your inability to understand and accusing others and telling them monster. If you are talking about infobox of Mumbai then I will say that the photo of Mumbai consists of many photos and these type of pattern we see for country or city articles. So they are very suitable. This article has single long image, not consists of many images. The photo, a low-quality image, and the photo is seen like unmatched position. So accusing anyone will not get us anywhere. You need to think carefully before saying anything. Mehedi Abedin 15:08, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mehediabedin: Okay, now you are bullying. First you give me a barnstar, now you are bullying me? You are confusing me here. Mumbai does have a large image of its cityscape in the article, not in the infobox. You still haven't given a good reason as to why my proposed image is so unacceptable to you and AMomen88. Bullying won't get you anywhere. The image I proposed is better than what you proposed. I would say Momen's picture is better than what you proposed as well. Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 15:34, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can a neutral third party please choose a good picture for the infobox? I am getting tired of this.--Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 15:37, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Solomon The Magnifico: Bullying? This is baseless. I told you that you should "think carefully before saying anything". It is not threating. I told that because you already said some insensible things to me and AMomen88 that anyone can think you are saying this without thinking anything. "Mumbai does have a large image of its cityscape in the article, not in the infobox". Is it then why you compare your photo in infobox with the photo in Mumbai that isn’t situated in the infobox of Mumbai? Compare infobox with infobox! "The image I proposed is better than what you proposed." Its your saying, not the fact. Your photo seems blurish a little bit and its size don't match with the infobox. That verifies my reason. But if you don't want to accept my judgement then we need to reach consensus with other users because that's what we do in Wikipedia. But "I would say Momen's picture is better than what you proposed as well" that we know very well. But your conditions results the photos I proposed. If we agree only the quality of picture then we really should use picture of Momen. But if you really have concern about the context of the photo then my proposed photo is better. So, do you really want to stick to your conviction? Or wait for other users to give consensus? Mehedi Abedin 15:51, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it not a fact? In every possible way, my image is pictorially better than what you proposed. In terms of resolution and the quality of architecture, it is better. I don't understand what you are trying to say. So I'm going to stop here. You are confusing me. That's why I hesitate to even talk to editors from Bangladesh. This has gone on for too long. It's a pity that the rest of the Wikipedia community won't intervene because they probably think Bangladeshis fight for no reason (which has been proven to be true). Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 15:56, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Solomon The Magnifico: Wikipedia doesn’t work like that. It is based on consensus. You can't keep or edit anything because it is fact. Maybe a thing is right to you but to other it’s the opposite. Even AMomen88 was against the photo. But yet you didn’t reach for settling conflict but mentioned me here to help. What I did here to resolve this and what happened here is not fight but process of conflict resolving. Preconceived ideas can leads to misunderstanding and sometimes saying someone something with preconceived ideas usually leads to conflict. Mehedi Abedin 16:26, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mehediabedin: Go for dispute resolution when consensus is not there. Clearly, we cannot reach a consensus. So just request dispute resolution. Look it up. You might find it useful. Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 16:32, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Solomon The Magnifico: Already did it. If they support your photo then I will have no objection and I believe that the dispute will be solved, because our dispute is not personal. Our dispute is related to a specific subject. Mehedi Abedin 16:47, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Solomon The Magnifico: @Mehediabedin: This is my personal preference, the Panthapath image which shows modern glass plate buildings present Bangladesh in a “better” light than the other images which show some rather mundane looking concrete buildings. Surely, you’d agree that plate-glass buildings at least look more modern than concrete buildings. The fact that Gulshan is a prosperous neighbourhood isn’t relevant, what’s relevant is the image should be aesthetically pleasing, most people who come across the lead image won’t hunt for the headquarters of banks and private enterprise like Solomon, they will take one look and cast aspersions. I doubt we will find any image of Wikimedia Commons which accurately captures the public and private sector so we should abandon this endeavour and choose which image looks best. I don’t understand why Solomon has such an obsession with Gulshan, in an edit summary he bizarrely said just because you are not from Gulshan does not mean you can remove the image of the countrys most affluent neighbourhood.. Its unsurprising seeing Solomon make baseless accusations of being "politically motivated", he made the same defamatory comment about me merely because of my edits on Sheikh Mujibur Rahman asking for due diligence on the dozens of edits he made. I believe the Panthapath image casts Bangladesh in a good image and will benefit the article.–AMomen88 (talk) 18:01, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I use reliable sources for all my edits. You revert wholesale without explanation and accuse others of having narratives. Panthapath is not the financial center of Bangladesh. It has a shopping mall, that's it. You want an image of a financial center. Well, then Gulshan Avenue is by far the largest financial center with the highest concentration of financial institutions in Bangladesh. Solomon The Magnifico (talk) 18:39, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sujon[edit]

Roy 2400:C600:3463:3D1:1:0:5765:782F (talk) 05:04, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

About Changing photo[edit]

i changed the photo and didn't go well @pinu Rahman pls can you upload the photo again 45.248.148.108 (talk) 15:25, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Irrelevant citation[edit]

I have removed the following citation because it is irrelevant:

  • <ref name="IMFWEO">
    "WEO Database, October 2023. Report for Selected Countries and Subjects: World, European Union". IMF.org. International Monetary Fund. 10 October 2023. Retrieved 10 October 2023.

The page allows you to download an Excel spreadsheet called WEO_Data.xls that compares World and EU GDP from 2021 to 2028. It is labelled "International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, October 2023". It says nothing about any individual country's economy.-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:57, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry i copied the wrong link my intention was really an individual country i forgot to put specific query on report the blame is on me. Maoylord (talk) 13:22, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your new URL is to the right page. -- Toddy1 (talk) 13:48, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]