Talk:Mahdist War

There's a hole in the article
I'm not competent but I find it strange that this article mentions neither the Beja nor the Fuzzy Wuzzies. Maikel 12:05, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

The reasons of the revolt
The article used to say that one of the reasons for the start of the revolt were the egyptian attempts to abolish slave trade. It truth is quite the opposite, as one of the main reasons for invading Sudan in the first place was to obtain slaves for service in the Egyptian army.

Can Advisers Consent?
"The British advisers to the Egyptian government gave tacit consent for another expedition." I find this sentence a bit strange -- if they were only advisers how can they consent? Flaviusvulso (talk) 05:26, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mahdist War. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070505223922/http://marty-center.uchicago.edu/webforum/052004/commentary.shtml to http://marty-center.uchicago.edu/webforum/052004/commentary.shtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130710201049/http://www.sudanrailways.gov.sd/en/history.htm to http://sudanrailways.gov.sd/en/history.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:07, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Australia?
How can Australia have been a belligerent? The war was in the 19th century, and Australia did not exist until the 20th century. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.90.242.158 (talk) 15:50, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Mahdi was well armed
The idea that the Mahdist forces at Omdurman were poorly armed is an oft-repeated myth to explain their catastrophic defeat. They certainly had 30,000 modern rifles, and reportedly also some machine guns and artillery. They simply didn't use them well. Cassandra

Sentence fragment removed
The following sentence fragment was near the end of the lead:

Expanding the scale of the conflict to include not only Britain and Egypt but the Italian Empire, the Belgian Congo and the Ethiopian Empire.

If someone can complete the thought, or turn it into a sentence, it can be put back in. MayerG (talk) 03:16, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

New South Wales, not Australia...
Can somebody correct the inclusion of Australia - prior to its federated existence - as being involved in this British Empire Imperialist war, as it was solely a New South Wales contingent that fought and as a colonial expeditionary force, thus the flag will also need to be corrected. Furthermore, can someone actually illustrate the activities of the New South Wales and Canadian colonial expeditionary forces, as I see nothing speaking to their involvement in this war as members of the Empire in any regards. Both colonies had achieved Responsible Government during the mid 1800s, so they are NOT "British" and are not to be lumped in with such a term - anywhere in Wikipedia - from that period onwards, within any conflicts the British Empire engaged in historically. Nürö G'DÄŸ MÄTË 10:33, 20 November 2021 (UTC)