Talk:Battle of Ghazni

Afghanistan Low‑importance

	Afghanistan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Afghanistan, a project to maintain and expand Afghanistan-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AfghanistanWikipedia:WikiProject AfghanistanTemplate:WikiProject AfghanistanAfghanistan articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Asian / British / European / Indian / South Asia B‑class

This 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.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

B

This article has been rated as B-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	Indian military history task force
	South Asian military history task force

Untilted

Governor-General not Viceroy.

During this period India was under the control of the British East India Company, their chief official in India was called the “Governor-General of India”. The title Viceroy of India only came in use when the British Government took over direct control of India from the company after in 1858. Jalipa 23:15, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

False portrayal

The painting of the battle of Ghazni shown in the taxobox of the article depicts events falsely. The fort was entered through a breach after Indian sappers and miners fired a mine. The charge was under battle conditions and not the orderly lines shown here.AshLin (talk) 05:37, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect orbat

The orbat given here taken from the British Army history site incorrectly lists the units. The Battle Honour declaration of the Governor -General is the more authentic. Comparing the two lists in the articles shows the obvious deficiencies. This event reflects the unreliability of websites as a whole as opposed to printed references. AshLin (talk) 05:49, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Battle of Ghazni. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:08, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]