Talk:British Bangladeshis

"Racist Murder of Altab Ali: A Bengali East End Garment Worker Murdered in 1978" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Racist Murder of Altab Ali: A Bengali East End Garment Worker Murdered in 1978. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 26#Racist Murder of Altab Ali: A Bengali East End Garment Worker Murdered in 1978 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:52, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Proposed removal of youth gang

This section seems undue and out of place considering various ethnic minorities in London such as African Caribbean have massive issues with gang related violence yet the African-Caribbean British people article doesn't mention any of these problems. I think it maybe time to balance things out? 90tillinfinitydue (talk) 07:26, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

40 times more likely

It says: "Bangladeshis living in London were 40 times more likely to be living in cramped and poor housing types of housing than anyone else in the country."

That claim is supported by the cited BBC report; but it doesn't make sense. An individual who is in fact living in poor housing is 100% certain to be living in poor housing. Perhaps it should be "than any other group in the country", and perhaps "up to 40 times more likely". But those words are not supported by the cited source. In particular, "40 times" looks like a suspiciously round number.

The Beeb is considered a [[WP:RS]], but that doesn't mean that anything from the Beeb is fine in wikipedia. The beeb, like any MSM source, employs writers and editors that can't parse a scientific report or construct a clear sentence,

The BBC claim comes from a report by the Policy Studies Institute, supposedly. Perhaps that report states the claim in clearer terms, and should be cited. But the BBC story doesn't link to the report, and I can't find it on the PSI website. MrDemeanour (talk) 13:49, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

So nobody has clarified this claim, or provided a citation, or piped-up here. I've deleted the claim. MrDemeanour (talk) 13:54, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Redrect page target

A discussion about changing the target of the redirect for the page Murder of Altab Ali has been started here. Please add any comments on that page, in order to keep the discussion in one place. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 21:34, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Definition in intro is inconsistent with List of British Bangladeshis - and with much of this article

According to the intro to this article, to be a "British Bangladeshi" one must have British citizenship. Bangladeshi immigrants to the UK who merely reside here or have indefinite leave to remain don't count unless they've obtained citizenship.

According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_Bangladeshis, though, "Bangladeshi immigrants settled or residing in the United Kingdom" are British Bangladeshis.

Which is correct - or do different speakers use different definitions? My personal observation/impression is that in Britain we tend to be fairly strict about only using the word "British" to refer to people who legally have British citizenship (unlike, say, the Americans, who tend to refer to anyone permanently resident in the USA as an "American" regardless of citizenship), but perhaps I've missed some people or organisations who use the term more loosely. A citation would be good in any case!

A further confusion is that, despite the definition in the intro purportedly limiting the topic of the article to British citizens, much of the article that follows completely ignores this. This entire paragraph, for instance, is about Bangladeshis who are resident in the UK, not those who have British citizenship:

Bangladeshis in the UK are largely a young population, heavily concentrated in London's inner boroughs. In the 2011 Census 451,529 UK residents specified their ethnicity as Bangladeshi, forming 0.7% of the total population. In the 2021 census, there were a total of 652,535 Bangladeshis in the United Kingdom, forming just under 1% of the total population.

I feel like this incoherence ought to be fixed somehow, though I'm not sure what the right fix is. ExplodingCabbage (talk) 19:06, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Opening definition is weird and wrong even if we DO want to limit it to British citizens

Even if we do want to limit our definition of "British Bangladeshi" to people with British citizenship, this is a pretty weird opening couple of sentences:

British Bangladeshis (Bengali: বিলাতী বাংলাদেশী, romanized: Bilatī Bangladeshī) are people of Bangladeshi origin who have attained citizenship in the United Kingdom, through immigration and historical naturalisation. The term can also refer to their descendants.

First of all, what is "historical naturalisation"? What is the distinction meant to be between attaining citizenship through "historical naturalisation" versus merely attaining it through "naturalisation"? I am fairly sure this phrase is just meaningless nonsense, but if I'm wrong, it should be clarified in the article.

Secondly, we're claiming that even people with Bangladeshi ethnic origin and British citizenship (or British+Bangladeshi citizenship) are nonetheless not "British Bangladeshis" unless they or their parents naturalised? So, for instance, if a Bangladeshi couple move to Britain and obtain ILR, then have a son in Britain (who is British by birth by virtue of his parents' ILR), then the son is not a British Bangladeshi because the parents never naturalised? That strikes me as profoundly weird; I don't think anybody uses the term in this rather arbitrary way, and don't see any cited sources to support this definition. ExplodingCabbage (talk) 19:26, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

First sentence of "Forced marriage" section is incoherent/confusing

It reads:

Forced marriages are rare; the British High Commission has been involved with many cases concerning on British citizens.

Two issues:

1. It's ungrammatical. I guessing "concerning on" should just read "concerning"?

2. It's somewhat self-contradictory. We say they're "rare" and then immediately say there are "many" cases.

Could do with improving somehow. ExplodingCabbage (talk) 19:28, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

I checked what I think is the edit that originally added this material, to see if the meaning was any clearer then. The wording was different but still confusing: Forced marriages are rare, however the practice is largely present in Bangladesh, the British High Commission has been involved with many cases concerning on British citizens. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:36, 1 October 2024 (UTC)