Talk:Battle of Maiwand

I'm not sure what citation accounts for Sardar Ayub Khan's forces being at 25,000, I assumed it was the one by Robson already cited for casualty count just underneath, but that source actually claimed the number of 10-15,000.^[1] In the same book Robson also claims a 2,600 army size of Burrows, not the 2,476 featured in the article. Jonathan L. Lee covers the Maiwand in his book, Afghanistan from 1260 in pp. 379-381 and is also cited in the article, but he makes no mention of the army size, just the already cited English casualty count. HistoricalWriting (talk) 05:30, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

after further investigation, the article does not actually cite this number; 25,000 dates to the article's creation, which predates its use of citations, on 20:32, 17 June 2005.

first of all, the article firstly falsely implies the backing of this number, with the source^[2] that says no such thing, in fact to quote the source:

"For half-an-hour or so nothing occurred to disclose the fact that the little force was facing the Afghan main body, for the heat haze, mirage, and dust prevented any accurate estimate of the enemy’s strength being made. Then their artillery began to come into action, until eventually the fire of thirty guns was concentrated on the British line."

However I did find a source backing 25,000 of Ayub Khan, it also claims 2,000 size of Burrows^[3]

The listed number of 2,476 regulars is from ^[4] which is already in the article on reference #7. HistoricalWriting (talk) 06:20, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

It is requested that an edit be made to the extended confirmed–protected article at Battle of Maiwand. (edit · history · last · links · protection log) This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "Please change X to Y". There is an extremely high backlog of edit requests. Please be very patient. The edit may be made by any extended confirmed user. Change the |answered=no parameter to "yes" when the request has been accepted, rejected, or put on hold. You may also wish to use the {{subst:EEp}} template in the response. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request.

Edit request:
change the present infobox on the main article to this one provided here on talk page (copy-paste wikitext) with references already provided in it: {{Infobox military conflict | conflict = Battle of Maiwand | partof = [[Second Anglo-Afghan War]] | image = Royal Horse Artillery fleeing from Afghan attack at the Battle of Maiwand.jpg | caption = ''Maiwand: Saving the Guns'' <br /> [[Richard Caton Woodville Jr.]], 1883 | date = 27 July 1880 | place = Near [[Maiwand]], [[Kandahar Province]] | result = Afghan victory | combatant1 = {{flagicon|United Kingdom}} [[British Empire]] *{{flagcountry|British Raj}} | combatant2 = {{flagicon|Afghanistan|1880}} [[Emirate of Afghanistan]] | commander1 = {{flagicon|United Kingdom}} [[George Burrows (Indian Army officer)|George Burrows]] | commander2 = {{flagicon|Afghanistan|1880}} [[Mohammad Ayub Khan (Afghanistan)|Ayub Khan]] | strength1 = '''Robson:''' * 2,600 regulars{{sfn|Robson|2007|p=232}}<br> '''Kakar:''' *2,800 regulars{{efn|accompanied by 2,000 followers{{sfn|Kakar|2006|pp=51–52}}}} '''Forbes:''' *2,476 regulars<ref name="Archibald">{{Cite book |last=Forbes |first=Archibald |url=https://archive.org/details/afghanwars18394200forbuoft |title=The Afghan Wars, 1839-42 and 1878-80 |publisher=Seeley and Co., Limited |year=1892 |edition=2nd |location=London}}</ref> | strength2 = '''Robson:''' * 10-15,000 regulars and irregulars{{efn|"nine regiments of regular infantry, three of cavalry, some 1,500 irregular cavalry.. ..total of about 6,400 men.. ..en route at Farah.. ..joined by some 1,500 of the Wali's troops and by large number of irregulars"{{sfn|Robson|2007|p=232}}}}<br> '''Kakar:''' *11,755 regulars and volunteers{{efn|4,555 infantry, 3,200 cavalry and 4,000 ghazis (irregulars){{sfn|Kakar|2006|p=51}}}}<br> '''Pykes:''' *25,000 regulars and irregulars<ref>[https://archive.org/details/historyofafghani031122mbp/page/n167/mode/2up A History of Afghanistan Vol. II] by Percy Sykes p. 145</ref> | casualties1 = '''Robson:'''<br>21 officers killed<br>948 men and 800 [[Camp follower|camp followers]] killed<br>169 men and 8 officers wounded{{sfn|Robson|2007|p=239}}<br>'''Lee:'''<br>More than 1,200 men killed<ref>{{Cite book |last=Lee |first=Jonathan |title=Afghanistan: A History from 1260 to the Present |publisher=Reaktion Books |year=2019 |isbn=9781789140101 |pages=380 |language=English}}</ref><br>'''Kakar:'''<br>1,100 casualties{{efn|both killed and wounded{{sfn|Kakar|2006|p=51}}}} | casualties2 = '''Robson:'''<br>2,500–3,000 killed and wounded{{sfn|Robson|2007|p=239}}<br>'''Kakar:'''<br>2,150 casualties{{efn|both killed and wounded{{sfn|Kakar|2006|p=51}}}} | campaignbox = {{Campaignbox Second Anglo-Afghan War}} }}
Justification:

the currently listed number on the infobox, of 25,000 has no source whatsoever in the entire article. The infobox is an old and outdated version that hasn't had its references adequately updated from 2005 when the article was first made. My edit request is to change the current infobox to the one I have provided here with more proper focused works that gives a more modern historical study treatment of the topic by various authors that cover Maiwand that haven't been provided to the article.

HistoricalWriting (talk) 13:02, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

 Not done This is far beyond a simple uncontroversial edit request, which you have been informed is all that you are allowed to do on articles that fall under the topic of Indian military history as a non-extended-confirmed editor. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:44, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

@The Bushranger hello the article infobox is unsourced, there is no source for the sole number it features on Sardar Ayub Khan's command. I have no clue what you're talking about on why its controversial; the parameter is genuinely unsourced since 2005, I'm going to relist the request now HistoricalWriting (talk) 03:52, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

it's obviously not controversial, are you saying the request itself has to be simple too? That's the wikipedia policy? HistoricalWriting (talk) 03:55, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

The examples of things non-extended confirmed editors are allowed to make edit requests for on pages under extended confirmed restrictions usually start with 'typo fixes and spelling corrections'. Proposing adding any content is not something you are allowed to do. (Note that infoboxes ideally shouldn't have sources in them anyway - they summarize what is sourced in the article.) - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 05:59, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

the extended-confirmed editor can decide on my change being appropriate or well-sourced. I am mentioning that the current infobox 25,000 listing isn't backed by a reference on either the infobox itself or on the article at all, and the reference that does back it is the most unreliable one unlike majority of modern and secondary sources I have given above that claim half the number, including all references that address the number that are already featured in the article HistoricalWriting (talk) 07:22, 21 July 2026 (UTC)