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
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
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Empire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of British Empire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.British EmpireWikipedia:WikiProject British EmpireTemplate:WikiProject British EmpireBritish Empire
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history
The third Anglo-Afghan result must change because it's wrong since the British won militarily and I can provide sources for what I'm saying. Panekasos (talk) 14:41, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well it’s not that simple. First you need to send the sources here. Then a discussion needs to happen. We need to analyze the sources you will provide, in order to make sure it’s reliable and accurate(preferably something that’s as reputable as iranica). ONUS is on you, so you’re the one who needs to gain consensus first. Basically you can’t add disputed content without attaining consensus first on the talk page. So you need to come to some sort of agreement with the users participating here(unless many others are willing to participate as well).
For that I think you should focus on familiarizing yourself with Wikipedia first before continuing this conversation(maybe edit articles on different topics). I definitely think there is at least a neutrality concern since your only purpose here so far has been to change the result of the first and third Anglo afghan wars.
Im just offering advice so you can avoid scrutiny in the future. Because I guarantee these concerns will probably eventually be brought up by another user. Someguywhosbored (talk) 03:49, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.helion.co.uk/conflicts/third-anglo-afghan-war.php this source tells that British were victorious with a minor strategic victory also the article in Wikipedia says that the afghan invasion failed and the British beat the afghans and kept the durand line. So it's contradicting so the right thing to do is change the result because the British were more successful in this war and the afghan invasion failed. Panekasos (talk) 09:11, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I sent many sources that prove what I said also as I said earlier the article in Wikipedia itself says that the British repelled the afghans so the afghan invasion failed Panekasos (talk) 10:05, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well again, I’d recommend you edit on other topics first because at the moment, your running a single purpose account. Nonetheless, I’ve went over the sources and here are my findings. I’m not going in order.
1. The national army museum source doesn’t say the British won.
“ Amanullah Khan ordered a ceasefire on 3 June 1919. His ambitious plans to reclaim Peshawar and throw the British out of India had failed.
But the Treaty of Rawalpindi (8 August 1919) that brought the war to an end did recognise full Afghan independence and finally gave the Afghans the right to conduct their own foreign affairs. This had probably been Amanullah’s real goal.”
Thats pretty much what we’ve been saying. Every other goal was secondary to achieving Afghan independence. And this source doesn’t claim that the British “won”.
It also states right at the end that the outcome of the war was a contentious topic. “The outcome of the war remains contentious”
(Also why is there ChatGPT at the end of the source there? Is that where you’ve been looking this content up)?
For this source, it just says that the British “claimed” victory(both sides did) but than goes onto say that the situation didn’t actually end their troubles as they thought, and that the Afghans actually achieved a “diplomatic” victory.
“ the Government of India muddled the campaign and muddled the peace.”
So again, this doesn’t imply that the British won. Just that they claimed victory despite that not being the case. It goes on to make the claim that the Afghans achieved a diplomatic victory because they gained their foreign policy back.
I can’t see the gale source. It just says search not found when I click the link. So can’t make any comment on that until you fix it.
This is the closest you’ve got to anything so far. Just because it mentions an actual authors name. But the issue is that Michael barthorps claim is contradicted by a far more reliable source(Iranica), and the article was updated back in 2011 which makes it more up to date. It was also written by a historian that specializes in this field (unlike Barthorp, Ludwig W. Adamec is actually an expert on Afghanistan it appears).
Also the source doesn’t say that the British outright won, just that they achieved a minor strategic victory. Regardless, other more reliable sources have differing views.
Anyway, most of these sources don’t actually claim the British won. And other issues were addressed by me as well. Right now, I’d seriously recommend that you edit in other areas on wiki. Otherwise it just seems like your here to push your own viewpoint onto the article, because that’s the only thing you’ve been editing about so far. Someguywhosbored (talk) 18:05, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
X
Diese Website benutzt Cookies. Wenn du die Website weiter nutzt, gehe Ich von Deinem Einverständnis aus.OKNeinDatenschutzerklärung