Talk:Bengali Hindus in Assam

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Hinduism Low‑importance Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. India: Assam / West Bengal Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Assam (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject West Bengal (assessed as Low-importance).

Read the article properly , it is written at the start

While KMSS leader Akhil Gogoi maintains a figure of one crore Hindu Bengalis in Assam, AASU chief adviser Samujjal Bhattacharya says there 70-72 lakh Hindu Bengalis in Assam.

But this is a claim, the writer Nandita saikia clearly rejects the claim writes

The BJP's goal of cultivating the support of a large chunk of Bengali Hindus in Assam using the controversial Citizenship (Amendment) Bill 2016 could very well be based on misconceptions if the available Census data is taken into account. Research reveals that the actual numbers of this community could be drastically less than imagined earlier.

From the Hindu Bengali Section

Due to the absence of a robust vital registration system, diverse opinions have been forwarded about the population of Bengali Hindus in Assam with estimates ranging between 40 to 70 lakh. As a demographer and having studied immigration in Assam for two years, it's difficult to accept these statistics on the Hindu immigrants from Bangladesh. A study on population composition of Assam reveals that the Hindu population in Assam has declined from 70.78 percent in 1951 to 61.47 percent in 2011 (see Figure 1).

Migration during 1951-1971---

the 1971 Census, and the consequent population increase in Assam, it can be concluded that about 12-14 lakh East Bengalis immigrated to Assam during 1951-1971. Out of this total number, Hindu immigrants would be around 4-5 lakh.

District wise population

The actual scenario about Hindu illegal immigrants in Assam also becomes clear when the religious composition of the population is analysed at the district level. Except in United Mikir and North Cachar Hills (currently Karbi Anglong and Dima Hasao), there is not a single district that shows a jump in the Hindu population. In United Mikir and North Cachar Hills, there was an increase in the Hindu population in 1971 due to the shift in reporting from “other religion” (probably recorded as animists in previous censuses) to Hindu religion. If there had been a massive Bengali Hindu immigration as stated by some intellectuals in Assam, this would have been evident at the district level population of undivided Cachar district). On the other hand, out of the eight original districts in the state (currently divided into 16 districts), the Hindu population has been overtaken by the Muslim population in five districts at a rather fast pace, thus bearing ample testimony that immigrant Muslims have occupied a large chunk of the excess 50 lakh population in Assam (as estimated by this researcher).

IN Barak valley

In Barak Valley as well, the Hindu growth rate has been continuously declining, whereas the Muslim growth rate has increased. The Hindu population in the Valley also includes non-Bengali Hindus, all Hindus recorded in the 1951 and 1971 census and the natural increase of the Hindu population.Therefore, the population of Bengali Hindu immigrants in Assam can be safely estimated at about five lakh prior to 1971 and it can be concluded that nearly no Hindu immigration happened in the post 1971 period. Hindu Bengalis who landed in Assam from Bangladesh in the post 1971 census to Assam moved out of the state before the 1991 census.

There are no estiamtes of bengali hindu as claimed by the writer herself.

@Fylindfotberserk, @Austronesier, @Kautilya3, request your comments on this article. The situation is much more nuanced than this article is presenting. I am not sure we can create a community of "Bengali Hindus of Assam", though sometimes we talk about Bengali Hindus and Bengali Muslims. Much of this community (Bengali Hindus - actually Sylheti Hindus), in the Barak Valley especially, are descendants from those who came to the region after the Partition of India. They have certainly suffered from being displaced from their original homes. But to ignore it is ahistorical. Chaipau (talk) 12:40, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Chaipau: What's exactly the issue here and what do you suggest? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:51, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The earlier claim was that the Bengali Hindus of Assam are mostly native to Barak Valley, which I changed with some reference [1]. This is being removed on the pretext that this is a historical issue and we need not bring this up here, and that too by an IP editor who seems to be pretty conversant with the issues here. If you looked at the edit history of this page you will not find too many IP editors. [2]. So, something is not very transparent here, and there is a WP:POV push going on here. The reason I said propaganda article here is because this ties in to a lot of political controversies around CAA and NRC.

Also, look at

WP:SOAP

These are politically contentious issues, and we have to be careful.

What I suggest is that these issues be presented with WP:NOV and the politics presented as is. All these articles need overhauls. Chaipau (talk) 13:42, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I understand bhai, but you haven't understood my words. I am not writing native anywhere in the present introduction section of the page, instead i am writing "concentrated" word that is - "The Bengali Hindus are concentrated in the Barak Valley region where they are politically, economically and socially dominant" which implies today scenario/landscape and there are reliable references provided for the writings as well. I was saying to you not to write history in the present (introduction page) which deals with their present numbers and conditions and I have moved your writing in the history section of the page as it deals with history.

So their is no controversy here. I hope I clarified the confusion.

Anyways, see my last edit in edit history section of the page. 2409:408A:8C8B:64DB:0:0:148A:C708 (talk) 14:01, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bhai the article is about their present demographic scenario not the past, as same is being written for total population of community in Assam and Brahmaputra Valley as well as per reliable census 2011 data.

The sentence - "The Bengali Hindus are concentrated in the Barak Valley region where they are politically, economically and socially dominant" is written as per as sources provided in current context and this all are talking about their current status and presence and not the history of immigration which is not needed as its not history section.

And yeah - you repeatedly adding 1835 year Pemberton claim which is not reliable as it was not a census data but his owm claim about the demography of the region and is also historical and is not needed here as those article is not talking about their present numbers and conditions as this article is dealing with their present scenario and not their history. 1851 census data of Cachar was more reliable one as it was first British census data established and not based on anyone else claim. 2409:408A:8C8B:64DB:0:0:148A:C708 (talk) 12:56, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:POV issues there might be need to be worked through. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:24, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  @Kautilya3, I agree, no need to remove. But it is so beset with POV issues that it is tending WP:SOAP, even WP:HOAX. I shall be working on it. All the citations are selective and all the sources that have have examined are misquoted or selectively quoted. Chaipau (talk) 21:37, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't think the user Chaipau is neutral here as his edit are going against a certain community and are problematic per say

  WP:OR and WP:Consensus

  as he is repeatedly using claims of some random people (who are not well known recognized historians) as reliable source for his publications which is resulting in a conflict of interest, including promoting own or their community's interests.

@

Aftabuzzaman

: @Jayantanth:@Snusho:@Titodutta:@Dev0745: @আফতাবুজ্জামান: @Ku423winz1: @বাক্যবাগীশ: @Ei to ami akash: @Jeet Dev: @Abhijitsathe: @

Animeshkulkarni

: I request your comments on this article Pitush Puttar (talk) 05:21, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't know how I earned a ping in the above list of illustrious contributors. However, if there is an issue, it would be better to identify text in the article that might be a problem (preferably in a new section), with a brief explanation. Do not use an article talk page to give opinions regarding other editors. Johnuniq (talk) 05:51, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Pitush Puttar please keep me out of whatever this is. Drmies (talk) 11:41, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]