Talk:Bir Uttom

Untitled

In what language does Bir Uttom = Best Hero?

In Bengali Language. Thanks. --Ragib 05:34, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Bir Uttam vs Bir Uttom

Is there a way to also refer to the heading as Bir Uttam? That way either spelling will find the article. Right now Bir Uttam matches no entry. Thats not good. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohaider (talk • contribs)

Done. Check Bir Uttam now. --Ragib 21:12, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

The list

The list is going on. --Librarianpmolib (talk) 04:12, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Nice work on the list! Arman ^(Talk) 07:59, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

S.I.s

Is there any particular reason for there being two S.I. no 40s ? I ask because ... RASAM (talk) 15:31, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Questions

Questions about the tables:

1. What is "Sl. no."? Is this a sequence number of awards? If so, shouldn't it be unique and somewhat consistent in format? There are two "40"s, two "50"s, as well as a "598987" where I would expect "54". If these are just assigned by the person writing the source, and not an official number associated with the award, they don't belong.
2. What is "ID no."? If this is a personal national identification number, it seems non-encyclopedic at best.
3. Should we be listing people that have no article? Are they considered notable and do they belong here if not?

—[AlanM1(talk)]— 12:33, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

It is OK to list non-notable people who have direct relevance in the article -- in this case their relevance is as recipients of a relatively rare award. As a point of comparison, the B-class article Longest recorded sniper kills lists just under twenty named individuals, of whom the majority do not have articles about them because they are not individually notable according to Wikipedia standards. MPS1992 (talk) 20:43, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

As another point of comparison, List of George Cross recipients claims that medal to be "the joint highest award of the United Kingdom honours system", although other articles seem to suggest otherwise; it lists every recipient, and the redlinks imply that every recipient is likely to be individually notable. List of recipients of the George Medal, 1960s-1980s and similar articles, talk about a medal awarded to over 2000 people, and list every single recipient even including those presumed not to be individually notable. MPS1992 (talk) 21:22, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

• Without the gazette, which is difficult to obtain, I can't be sure about the first two columns. Tables produced by the government of Bangladesh frequently start with a sequential Sl. no. (serial number) column. The two 40s, two 50s, and rogue 598987 could be translation errors, typos, or errors in the original. The ID no. is likely a military ID number. Some Bangladeshi names are quite common, so the ID may be useful in distinguishing awardees from other members of the military with the same name, but otherwise probably isn't of interest to an encyclopedia.

Per WP:SOLDIER, being awarded the second-highest award for valor is insufficient to presume notability. Some (maybe all) of the people on this list who don't have articles are not notable. My reading of WP:LISTBIO, WP:LISTPEOPLE, and WP:CSC is that it's okay to include non-notable people for completeness if the list is well defined, relatively short, doesn't claim to be a list of notables, and if that's the consensus at the page. It might be worth checking the red links against bn.wikipedia.org. If it has an article about them, use {{ill}} to link to it. If it doesn't have an article about them, de-link them, because it's unlikely that sufficient sources will be found to turn the link blue. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:00, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

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

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

• Bir-Uttom-Podak.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:37, 19 April 2021 (UTC)