Jump to content

Talk:Second siege of Anandpur: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
Line 76: Line 76:


::::Says the editor that was writing OR into the article. --[[User:Kansas Bear|Kansas Bear]] ([[User talk:Kansas Bear|talk]]) 19:49, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
::::Says the editor that was writing OR into the article. --[[User:Kansas Bear|Kansas Bear]] ([[User talk:Kansas Bear|talk]]) 19:49, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
:::::Not OR. Nope. [[Special:Contributions/134.195.198.201|134.195.198.201]] ([[User talk:134.195.198.201|talk]]) 19:59, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:59, 4 October 2021

WikiProject iconIndia: History Start‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as Mid-importance).
WikiProject iconMilitary history: Asian / South Asia / Early Modern Stub‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
StubThis article has been rated as Stub-class on the project's quality scale.
Associated task forces:
Taskforce icon
Asian military history task force
Taskforce icon
South Asian military history task force
Taskforce icon
Early Modern warfare task force (c. 1500 – c. 1800)

Spreading false information

Hlo sir please read about Indian history. You are spreading false information on Indian history. Your edits are inappropriate please verify them before editing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aradhyasharma (talkcontribs) 02:21, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What the sources state

According to Dictionary of Battles and Sieges: A-E, ed. Tony Jaques, page 49, "Imperial troops were repulsed in northern Punjab at Basoli and Anandpur, and Emperor Aurangzeb sent Generals Wazir Khan and Zaberdast Khan to besiege Sikh Guru Gobind Singh in his stronghold at Anandpur, northeast of Ludhiana. Facing starvation, the Guru capitulated in return for safe passage, but the Sikhs were treacherously attacked at the Sarsa(20 May - 20 December 1704)".
Seeing how the Sikhs capitulated, then the Mughals won this siege. I would suggest Aradhyasharma stop edit warring and bring his concerns here. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:40, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sir the battle took place at Anandpur in 1701 .Jagatullah gujar leader was killed see in the source. Please take prompt action. Shah439 (talk) 05:48, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the article myself sir no it is your responsibility to secure itShah439 (talk) 08:23, 23 April 2015 (UTC) Shah439 (talk) 08:23, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the article myself sir no it is your responsibility to secure itShah439 (talk) 08:23, 23 April 2015 (UTC) Shah439 (talk) 08:23, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Source clearly says it occured in 1704, also source indicates it was a Mughal victory. Xtremedood (talk) 05:23, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit by Shah439

Shah439 is there any reason why you have resorted to a claim that is not supported by any academic source that I have researched? Are you willing to provide legitimate sources? What you are doing seems to amount to vandalism. Xtremedood (talk) 05:22, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sir i have some sources of the battle which claim that it was a Sikh victory.106.192.155.216 (talk) 01:50, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The user Shah439 was an account created against Wikipedia policies and has been found vandalising the articles. The user has been permanently blocked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Longlastingpeace (talkcontribs) 18:45, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sources of the article

1) [1] 2) [2] 106.192.155.216 (talk) 02:00, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Sagoo, Harbans (2001). Banda Singh Bahadur and Sikh Sovereignty. Deep & Deep Publications.
  2. ^ Surjit Singh Gandhi (2007). History of Sikh Gurus Retold: 1606-1708 C.E. Atlantic Publishers & Dist. p. 820-821. ISBN 9788126908585.

Article mismatches with the Result of the battle

Sir article has been mismatched with the reference of the battle. It was the battle between Sikhs and Hilly rajas there is no reference of Siege.this was not a siege .See other references also ghumand Chand , jagatullah Chand is not shown in your reference no. 1 which claims the mughals Victory. Change the date if the article also . I m posting some references of the battle also go through them also don't rely on single article Australianammu (talk) 09:36, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Marking for deletion

This article is completely misleading as no such battle took place at all in history. It is widely known that Battle of Anadpur took place (wikipedia page already renamed from first battle of Anandpur) and then the next battle that took place was battle of Nirmohgarh and then battle of Chamkaur took place where respected Guruji wrote Zafarnama and declared victory over Mughal forces. The user Shah439 along with his duplicate accounts have already been blocked for spreading misinformation. I'm marking this page for speedy deletion. Sohcb8 (talk)

Need amendment

[1][2] Ghumand leader, jagatullah. Please change the name of the battle It should be the battle of Anandpur 1701... Necessary action to be taken Ama975193 (talk) 17:37, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference sarsa was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ Jacques, p. 48

Clarification

According to Dictionary of Battles and Sieges: A-E, ed. Tony Jaques, page 49, "Imperial troops were repulsed in northern Punjab at Basoli and Anandpur, and Emperor Aurangzeb sent Generals Wazir Khan and Zaberdast Khan to besiege Sikh Guru Gobind Singh in his stronghold at Anandpur, northeast of Ludhiana. Facing starvation, the Guru capitulated in return for safe passage, but the Sikhs were treacherously attacked at the Sarsa(20 May - 20 December 1704)". Seeing how the Sikhs capitulated, then the Mughals won this siege.

Also, according to Tony Jaques, there were two battles at Anandpur in 1704[1], which one does the article reflect?

There was a battle of Anandpur in 1700(Jaques,p.48);

  • "In a fresh offensive against the Sikhs of the northern Punjab, Emperor Aurangzeb sent 10,000 men under Painda Khan and Dina Beg, who joined forces with the hill Chiefs led by Raja Ajmer Chand of Bilaspur. In the course of a long action near Anandpur, northeast of Ludhiana, Painda Khan was killed—reputedly in single combat by Guru Gobind Singh—and the Imperial army fled to Ropar."

There was another battle of Anandpur in 1701(Jaques,p.48-49);

  • "The hill Rajas of the northern Punjab regrouped after defeat at Anandpur the previous year and resumed their campaign against Sikh Guru Gobind Singh, joining forces with Gujar tribesmen to besiege Anandpur, northeast of Ludhiana. Gujar leader Jagatullah was killed on the first day and the Rajas were driven off after a brilliant defence led by the Guru’s son Ajit Singh."

And this, Bhagat Lakshman Singh, (1995). Short Sketch of the Life and Work of Guru Govind Singh, The Tenth and Last Guru, does not appear to be a reliable source.


I would say this article needs to be re-written, since it is largely unreferenced or referenced by an unreliable source. Oh, and Jagatullah was killed in 1701, so I seriously doubt he was fighting a battle in 1704! --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:01, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The sources do not state that it was Mughal victory nor that there was any surrender. There was an agreement which was broken by the Mughals and then the later battle ensued in a different location after all the civilians and survivors left Anandpur. 134.195.198.201 (talk) 16:52, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you do not know what the word, "capitulated", means then you should not be editing Wikipedia. Continue edit warring and you will be reported. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:11, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
please follow Wikipedia Be civil policy when having a discussion on talk page. I was looking at page 914. But I did eventually see referenced page after downloading book. 134.195.198.201 (talk) 17:49, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Spare me your supposed concern for Wikipedia policies when you restored original research, edit warred OR back into the article, and act like you do not know what capitulate means. And this after being told to go to the talk page! If you have a problem with this, then contact an admin! --Kansas Bear (talk) 18:57, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for making it obvious that your opinion doesn't matter from the kind of personal views you carry.134.195.198.201 (talk) 19:18, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Says the editor that was writing OR into the article. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:49, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not OR. Nope. 134.195.198.201 (talk) 19:59, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]