Talk:Battle of Manupur

Former featured article candidateBattle of Manupur is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Good articleBattle of Manupur has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 6, 2025Good article nomineeListed
August 30, 2025Featured article candidateNot promoted
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on September 17, 2025.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Ahmad Shah Durrani faced an army five times larger than his own at the Battle of Manupur?
Current status: Former featured article candidate, current good article

Infobox belligerents flags and commanders

Noorullah21, the commanders parameter is for key or significant commander as evidenced by the body of the article. It is not simply that they are mentioned in the body of the article, such as the death of Jani Khan - the only mention of Jani Khan in the body of the article. Their death does not evidence why they were a key or significant commander in the battle. There are others listed at present that are similar. The commanders section needs to be culled accordingly and to a maximum of seven per the template doc.

The Maharaja of Patiala (Patiala State) did not exist as such until 1762 (after the battle of 1748). Reference to it as a belligerent is an inappropriate anachronism. The use of the coat of arms for Malerkotla State would also appear to be an anachronism, with its English motto. Per MOS:FLAGS: it should not be used to represent the country when the context is specifically about a time period predating the flag. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:25, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Patiala state came to creation in 1762, but the title of Maharaja of Patiala had existed since 1709 (Ala Singh was a local chieftan).
Jani Khan was a Mughal officer, meaning it is relevant for them to be in the infobox, no? Malerkotla’s flag can be removed. Noorullah (talk) 00:30, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The title is for a person (commander) not a belligerent (a state or similar) and Ala Singh did not hold that title? Jani Khan being an officer (commander) does not make him (and some others) a key or significant commander. Being killed (what the body of the article mentions) does not make them a key or significant commander. Cinderella157 (talk) 11:05, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
He was.. Ala Singh held the title since 1709, Jani Khan's argument is sound. Noorullah (talk) 18:50, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noorullah21, in this edit [1], you have reinserted the various icons (seals and coats of arms as well as flags) with the edit summary: Situations where flag icons may be used in infoboxes include: Summarizing military conflicts. MOS:INFOBOXFLAG is not a blanket exemption. Further detail is given at MOS:MILFLAGS - Can flag icons be used consistently? This is a case when they cannot as we are substituting a seal and a coat of arms for flags and one instance where there is no icon. The coat of arms is also an issue as it appears to be anachronistic. See also MOS:COA. I note a similar situation at Sack of Delhi (1757) with this edit [2]. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:53, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see the point with consistency and the coat of arms issue with Ala Singh. I'll mend that. Noorullah (talk) 20:58, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For Durrani, the seal given is his own personal seal and I wouldn't see that applying to others in that sense. For other battles like Sack of Delhi I think its relevant to differentiate parties, in this case Manupur the sole party is the Durranis. Noorullah (talk) 21:06, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Per MILFLAGS: If only a few have them [flags], it may be better to omit flags for all the items than to have a different layout for each one and When flag icons are used, they should be historically accurate ones. The seal of Ahmad Shah Durrani is not a flag and it is inappropriate to represent it as a flag (see also MOS:COA). Not all belligerents have a flag. In such a case, we should not use flags. Cinderella157 (talk) 22:17, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because.. the old page used poor quality sources, (see the AFD), there was also copyright issues with the sources used. Instead, numerous high quality sources have been substituted and added into the article that follow WP:RS and WP:HISTRS. Also see discussion at this page. --Noorullah (talk) 18:42, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA review

Passed. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 12:11, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Battle of Manupur/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Noorullah21 (talk · contribs) 19:16, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: TheNuggeteer (talk · contribs) 23:52, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Will probably review this article from the weekend to Monday. Thanks, 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 23:52, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Noorullah (talk) 01:00, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

  • Everything looks nice here.

Background

  • "on 19 February" add a comma after this date.
  • "a victory so significant" is this a NPOV?

Battle

  • Can you provide a link or note on the meaning of "center"?
  • "Afghan army only had" add comma after this.
  • Can't find a mention of the 5:1 in the reference. Is this in the book?
  • "withdrawing as the Mughals attempted to respond, and continuing it." what do you mean by "and continuing it"?

Spotcheck

  • I checked as many sources and sentences as I can, possibly reviewing an estimate of 25 sources. The sources are hard to find because of the bibliography's offline state (some of the sources can only be viewed through preview). Most of these sources were correct, so I trust the sources of the article.

Overall, this article is in a nice state. This can probably be upgraded to FA status after you fix some mistakes. Thanks, 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 04:01, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Noorullah21: ping. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 04:01, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TheNuggeteer Hey, thanks for the review;
Fixed most the issues.
For the 5:1, it is in the book: "The Abdali’s army* on the best estimate was not more than 12,000 strong, and the imperialists were five-fold superior to him in number of men and immeasurably stronger in artillery." [3]
"Can you provide a link or note on the meaning of "center"?" - I can't find a link for military organization regarding the centre/center. For an explanation, the center is the middle formation of the Mughal army (i.e the center), while it has flanks/wings (on the right and left). Think of it as a drawn straight line but it's divided by two lines.
This image somewhat explains it (read caption)
On the right (the black flags), the center would be the middle flag of the Afghan army, and it's wings/flanks are the top and bottom adjacent to it.
Do you suggest i leave a note of some form for that? Noorullah (talk) 04:17, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You should most likely leave a note. This is the only standing issue. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 09:24, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Noorullah21: ping. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 10:28, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TheNuggeteer Done, added a note. Noorullah (talk) 11:54, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Passing. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 12:08, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Rjjiii talk 03:57, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"The Abdali’s army on the best estimate was not more than 12,000 strong, and the imperialists were five-fold superior to him in number of men and immeasurably stronger in artillery." - Fall of the Mughal Empire, Volume 1, Jadunath Sarkar, pg.139
Improved to Good Article status by Noorullah21 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 5 past nominations.

Noorullah (talk) 05:23, 7 August 2025 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Interesting article, recently GA'd. I've fixed the formatting of the hook, which checks out with the provided source, and is fairly interesting. Nice work! ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:46, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

allikas: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Battle_of_Manupur