Draft talk:Battle of Umbarkhind

Comments

Some quick comments about the current draft, and especially the sources used:

• Sanyal, Subhojit (2013). Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. p. 84. ISBN 978-93-81607-22-0. is a picture-book for kids published by Om Kidz. Clearly unacceptable.
• Vaibhav, Purandare (22 August 2022). Shivaji: India' Great Warrior King. p. 53. ISBN 9789391165505. is a popular history written by a journalist with no history training, which is inadequate for a subject that is both controversial and has received immense scholarly coverage. Also the writing is pretty fanciful as in (afaik, there are no known Mughal accounts of this battle, so the Mughal thoughts and POV are likely simply made up)

But the Mughal force wasn’t unduly worried; there was utter quiet in the woods, and no enemy anywhere in sight. Suddenly, when Kartalab’s men had least expected it, there was an eerie rustling in the trees on both sides, and the Marathas appeared as if out of nowhere, showering arrows and firing their muskets. Taken aback, the Mughal side and its leaders fought valiantly, but the Marathas pounded their positions and made flight impossible. Amid the frenzied fighting, the earth turned a flaming red in the blood of the dead and the wounded.

• Sardesai, Govind Sakharam (1946). New History of the Marathas: Shivaji and his line (1600–1707). Phoenix Publications.: Sardesai, unlike the above two, was a genuine scholar. But the source is pretty dated and modern scholars are much more skeptical of the primary source Sardesai used to describe the battle, which is the 17th c work Shri Shivbharat by Shivaji's court poet, Kavindra Parmanand. For example, here is what Stewart N. Gordon says in The Marathas 1600–1818 published by Cambridge University Press:

The first histories, termed bakhars, and written in Marathi by Brahmin eulogists, were the product of the late seventeenth century to the mid-eighteenth century. The current consensus is that much of the genre was hagiographical and often confused in dating and placing events. Nevertheless, the best of this literature - the Shabasad Bakhar and the 91-Kalami Bakhar - is important both for the facts and the tone of the heroic and tragic events which form the basis of the popular history of Maharashtra. Unfortunately, many of the statements of even these two most reliable bakhars have found their way into scholarly writing without careful use of corroborating evidence.

And besides sourcing issues, the draft has lots of statements that are unsupported by even the cited sources. For example, the battle date (Sardesai dates it to 24 Jan 1661, which again I'll take with a pinch of salt); the claim that "Shivaji himself attacked the enemy in the rear"; the POV claim in wikipedia's voice that "Shivaji as the man of valour had own motto to not harm unarmed man and woman" etc. And some unparseable sentences such as "Shaista Khan ordered his... against Maratha Empire." A rewrite is needed. Abecedare (talk) 16:10, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

About the new citation added:

• Sorokhaibam, Jeneet (1 January 2013). Chhatrapati Shivaji: The Maratha Warrior and His Campaign. Vij Books India Pvt Ltd. p. 169. ISBN 978-93-82573-49-4.

Besides being another popular history by a non-expert and generic publisher, it is also a WP:CIRCULAR ref. Its description of the battle is at least in part apparently copied from the 2012 version of the wikipedia article. There are tons of such books churned out regularly (here's another one) given the immense following Shivaji has in the state of Maharashtra. Abecedare (talk) 16:28, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Can we move it to the article mainspace? Considering that this event has its notability (though it lacks contemporary sources as only Shivbharat talks about this event) also the issue of peacock terms can be addressed with neutral terms and removing non WP:RS sources. And citing more reliable sources like Shivaji His Life and Times. would be better. Apart from this I don't think it has any other drawbacks Sudsahab (talk) 09:02, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Manpower

Mughal manpower in the conflict is unknown. It is not mentioned by any of the reliable and conserved sources. It is often misleading. Ajayraj890 (talk) 17:29, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

@Ajayraj890I have at least two reliable sources mentioning Mughal strength in this battle so kindly don't mislead or start a conflict of interest for your external purposes Melechha (talk) 22:34, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Two reliable sources? There is no redirect to the sources first of all. And find the oldest source you could find about this event and cite them. The event took place in 17th century and the sources you have mentioned are of 20th or 21st century. Moreover, none of them are independent sources. The source that have cited haven't cited from where they refered for the information. Ajayraj890 (talk) 01:24, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Remove the image that you have used here. It doesn't represent the event. I just found out that it was made by yourself. So remove it else I would be have to inform an administrator. Ajayraj890 (talk) 01:27, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Can you just elaborate why I can't use this image? I mean it was available online I ain't even made it and it's representing the events happened after the battle of Umberkhind. Melechha (talk) 11:59, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

That image is a copyright violation as a derivative work of the 1983 book Raja Shivchhatrapati by Babasaheb Purandare with illustrations by Dinanath Dalal. You cannot simply upload work you found on the internet and falsely claim it as your "own work", as you've been told before. Nominated for deletion on Commons. Abecedare (talk) 14:07, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Again I remind you that the 'strength' mentioned in the infobox doesn't cite any reliable sources. One of the source shows error and other one can't be considered as a reliable source. It is not redirecting to any pages, it is written in 2022. I have an advice for you. If the source you have mentioned here is based on other inscriptions, if it is older, the book must have given the reference in itself. Cite that reference. If the book doesn't cite any source in itself, we should remove the strength tag. The reason why I am saying this is, one of the sources cited in the older version of the article's source was wikipedea itself. Ajayraj890 (talk) 02:01, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Got it Melechha (talk) 10:05, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I have cited a source for the Mughal strength check it now. Melechha (talk) 22:28, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes. But that source does not mentions any battle? Was there a battle or was that just a confrontation? Ajayraj890 (talk) 13:56, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

April 2024

@Sudsahab, before working on this article again, I suggest you to read the Battle of Umberkhind section at [1]. Also, pinging @Abecedare. Imperial^[AFCND] 08:08, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

I'll surely discuss with @Abecedare Sudsahab (talk) 08:44, 7 April 2024 (UTC)