Talk:Siege of Chittorgarh (1567–1568)

Images from greatestbattles.iblogger.org
iblogger.org is on the blacklist so images from it should not be used. See also the whitelist discussion|

Graeme374 (talk) 04:44, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

NPOV
The article, especially the introduction, seems more like an opinion rather than objective facts. Morever, there are no supporting citations for that. Hence this content should either be done away with or modified with verifiable facts.180.151.22.67 (talk) 17:30, 1 July 2015 (UTC)Aman


 * Large swathes of unsourced information appears to have been removed since July 2015. Removing POV tag.--Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 08:11, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Neutrality??
It looks as if this article is more like an opinion or a biased story. This article should just state the facts and with Neutral point of view. The stuff is stuffed with adjectives which are biased much of the times. Adjectives should be done away with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.219.49.154 (talk) 04:59, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Restore to older version
there have been a lot of edits on this article without references. The older version was a lot more neutral.Divyraj (talk) 15:08, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Abul Fazl's description of the siege
Abul Fazl comments on the horrors of the bloody battle for the conquest of Chittor in verse as follows:

"No one ever saw such battles, Nor ever heard of such from the experienced. What shall I say of that battle and engagement, I cannot mention one item out of a hundred thousand.

Divyraj (talk) 15:13, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

The casualties on Mughal side
I can understand that the casualties on Mughal side is displayed on the infobox based on the statement of Satish Chandra The siege also resulted in heavy casualties on the Mughal side, where two hundred of them were killed every day. But wouldn't it be considered as original research as the author doesn't give any direct statement about the casualties? Imperial [AFCND]  14:20, 25 December 2023 (UTC)


 * @Re Packer&Tracker, I am not sure about this but won't it be considered as original research? Or am I wrong? Imperial  [AFCND]  06:10, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * @Re Packer&Tracker, I hope you saw the ping as you edited several times after the ping. If there is no comment on this topic, can I remove the casualties from the Mughal sides? It seems like WP:OR. Imperial  [AFCND]  13:06, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the late reply, though I was notified of the ping but due to paucity of time could not get back to you immediately, as far as your concern regarding the original research is concerned, that's barely the case here, We are simply using a modern reliable source for the casualties on Mughal side who himself (Satish Chandra) is citing it from the primary chroniclers (Nizamuddin Ahmed, Abu Fatal, Q and Hari et al)
 * - It's obvious from sources that siege lasted for a particular time and given they lost two hundred individuals everyday, it's a simple calculation to add the number of slain and it's not original research (we are also adding about 25,000 not a exact number based on this authority) Re Pa©ker&#38;Tra©ker   (♀)  14:31, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok. But do check this discussion. @Deltaspace42 said that it would be original research.  Imperial  [AFCND]  14:43, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @Re Packer&Tracker: Yeah, it's not a "simple calculation", you can't just multiply casualties like that. Furthermore, if one source gives an approximate number of casualties per day and another gives the duration of the siege and you then use these two sources to reach the conclusion about the total number of casualties yourself, then it's exactly an instance of WP:SYNTH, which is also not allowed here.  Delta  space 42 (talk • contribs) 16:08, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * In this discussion, Gog the Mild expressed an opposite opinion and says that it is acceptable. Considering that they are infinitely more experienced than me, I'm not going to argue and I think it would be better to leave this calculated number (25000) in the infobox (of course, it would be ideal to find the source which talks about the total number of casualties).  Delta  space 42 (talk • contribs) 16:33, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thankyou. @Re Packer&Tracker, does that source say anything about the date that the siege was initiated? I can only see the final date of that conflict. Imperial  [AFCND]  16:38, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi, just noticed this conversation., G.N. Sharma in "Mewar and the Mughal Emperors" mentions that Akbar reached Chittor on 23rd October 1567 and occupied the fort on 25th February 1568. Ranadhira (talk) 17:04, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your help. But we need quotation from the source of Satish Chandra himself. Else, it would fall under WP:SYNTH. Imperial  [AFCND]  17:57, 2 January 2024 (UTC)