This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Indian Army during World War I article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Indian Army during World War I has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Rather than make this page just a list of links, I'd like to expand it to be a brief overview of all Indian Army divisions and independent brigades of WW1, with links to longer articles where appropriate. Yorkist ( talk) 10:53, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
I suggest that the scope of article be expanded to include everything about Indian Army during World War 1 rather than just a list. Currently no such article exists. Vinay84 ( talk) 11:53, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Vinay84 ( talk) 05:27, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Sumner says that the meerut division joined Force D and not E
-- Vinay84 ( talk) 12:27, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
The 3rd and 7th divisions were transferred to Force E in 1918, together with about 36 Indian battalions attached to what were called British Divisions but they only had one British battalion per brigade so they had the same formation as a Indian division 1 British 3 Indian battalions per brigade. -- Jim Sweeney ( talk) 12:47, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
I have added the world war 1 template shown below twice in as many days.Why is it being deleted?
It is present in both British Army during World War I and History of the United Kingdom during World War I articles in which Jim has contributed.
-- Vinay84 ( talk) 05:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
-- Vinay84 ( talk) 07:16, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Here are some pointers I came up with looking through the article - call it an informal (and lazy :P) peer review for someone who can't be bothered to do it formally:
As well as the operations in the Kuki Hills (November 1st 1918 - May 15th 1919), punitive measures were carried out in the same area - but referred to as the Chin Hills - from December 1st 1917 until June 1st 1918. [Report of the Battles Nomenclature Committee]. Earlier punitive operations were undertaken in the Kachin Hills, thru' January and February 1915. [Report of the B.N.C., and London Gazette No. 29652, p. 6699].
--
FwdObserver (
talk)
23:36, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
This is a very nicely done article. I like how you have linked the Indian Army's activity to the other aspects of the war, placing it entirely in context. I might have appreciated knowing if there were internal political struggles going on, but perhaps that is another article entirely. I've made some very minor tweaks and grammar/punctuation fixes, nothing major, just to help with clarity and focus. Nicely done. Auntieruth55 ( talk) 19:26, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
I have serious reservations about the speedy award of GA status to this article right now! An article about a national army should at least also cover:
I sincerely believe that this is a GA or even an A-Class article. But it still needs some work, and we should not be submitting articles for peer review, and then promoting them in a parallel course to the review process! I have not reverted the GA status, but I urge you to consider the comments from the MilHist project.
Farawayman ( talk) 07:37, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
-- Vinay84 ( talk) 07:27, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Vinay, Farawayman has some valid criticisms that need to be addressed to prepare for A-level review; I agree that this article has some gaps that need to be filled before you try to take it that far.
ndian Mountain Artillery
and the war formed batteries
The Pioners regiments were all infantry who also undertook some building tasks -- Jim Sweeney ( talk) 21:05, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
So, lest you think this is done, it's not. :) But you've made a terrific start, and it appears that Farawayman is interested in helping you bring this along. Good luck!
The InfoBox at the start indicates pre-1914 and post-1918 engagements - Would it not be better to only list the colours awarded to the Indian regiments for WWI? Farawayman ( talk) 20:40, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
There was no Auxiliary Force as such until 1920, when the Auxiliary Force, India, was created from the Indian Defence Force, which was itself created in 1917 from the various Indian Volunteer Corps.
--
FwdObserver (
talk)
22:58, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Please post more photos of Indian soldiers in the European, African, Asian theaters of war. — Preceding unsigned comment added by F.desert ( talk • contribs) 06:12, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
I think it would be a good idea to rename the heading and the relevant text to British-Indian army. Otherwise, a wrong notion the current-day Indian army was involved in the war can creep in. Current day India is a totally different entity with a different national flag, national anthem, and much else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.201.250.149 ( talk) 05:17, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Indian Army | |
---|---|
Country | India |
Allegiance | British Empire |
Type | Army |
Size | 1,780,000 |
Engagements | World War I |
Gday. I can see this was discussed about 6 years ago but I think there is an issue with the infobox and that it may be time to re-examine the issue. Currently it seems to cover the entire period of the British Indian Army's existence; however, this article is about the organisation during World War I only so in my opinion the infobox should reflect that. Consider - at the moment the infobox includes battles both before and after World War I, whilst none of the notable commanders listed in the infobox commanded it during World War I either. As such I propose changing it to reflect World War I only (my proposed revised infobox would look something like this). Does anyone have any opinions or comments on this issue? Thanks. Anotherclown ( talk) 10:59, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
This article currently states: "In 1914, the Commander–in–Chief was General Sir Beauchamp Duff of the Indian Army,[15] and the Chief of the General Staff was Lieutenant General Sir Percy Lake of the British Army.[16]" I'm no expert on the British Indian Army so this may well be true (it certainly appears to be cited to reliable sources). However, this sentence seems to contradict the wiki articles on these two gentlemen. For instance the article on Beauchamp Duff states that he was "Chief of the General Staff in India from March 1906 to 1909" and that in 1914 he was as ADC General to HM the King (although this point isn't supported with a citation). Equally, the wiki article on Percy Lake states: he was "Chief of the General Staff in India from 1912." Meanwhile, our article on Commander-in-Chief, India states Beauchamp Duff was appointed to the posn in 1914, while Lake isn't even mentioned. The point is that one (or more) of these articles is incorrect. As such is someone with some knowledge of the topic possibly able to review this matter and confirm which is correct? Thanks again. Anotherclown ( talk) 11:13, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
Indian Army during World War I. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 22:58, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Indian Army during World War I. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:30, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Indian Army during World War I. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:18, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Indian Army during World War I. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:46, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
Where are the numbers of casualties taken from? No source is cited. Several internet articles cite those numbers but also give no source. The only other numbers I’ve seen are those given by the British Secretary of State for India in 1919 and they’re very different. Also the sentences describing the numbers are confused and don’t make sense: they appear to give two numbers for total deaths. Djewesbury ( talk) 22:41, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
Can someone please give a citation for the size of the Army given in the infobox. By 'size' is it referring to the peak combat strength at some given point in time, or the total who served during the entirety of the Great War. Searching for the figure only leads back to the Wikipedia article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.14.205.196 ( talk) 05:35, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Indian Army during World War I article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Indian Army during World War I has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Rather than make this page just a list of links, I'd like to expand it to be a brief overview of all Indian Army divisions and independent brigades of WW1, with links to longer articles where appropriate. Yorkist ( talk) 10:53, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
I suggest that the scope of article be expanded to include everything about Indian Army during World War 1 rather than just a list. Currently no such article exists. Vinay84 ( talk) 11:53, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Vinay84 ( talk) 05:27, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Sumner says that the meerut division joined Force D and not E
-- Vinay84 ( talk) 12:27, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
The 3rd and 7th divisions were transferred to Force E in 1918, together with about 36 Indian battalions attached to what were called British Divisions but they only had one British battalion per brigade so they had the same formation as a Indian division 1 British 3 Indian battalions per brigade. -- Jim Sweeney ( talk) 12:47, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
I have added the world war 1 template shown below twice in as many days.Why is it being deleted?
It is present in both British Army during World War I and History of the United Kingdom during World War I articles in which Jim has contributed.
-- Vinay84 ( talk) 05:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
-- Vinay84 ( talk) 07:16, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Here are some pointers I came up with looking through the article - call it an informal (and lazy :P) peer review for someone who can't be bothered to do it formally:
As well as the operations in the Kuki Hills (November 1st 1918 - May 15th 1919), punitive measures were carried out in the same area - but referred to as the Chin Hills - from December 1st 1917 until June 1st 1918. [Report of the Battles Nomenclature Committee]. Earlier punitive operations were undertaken in the Kachin Hills, thru' January and February 1915. [Report of the B.N.C., and London Gazette No. 29652, p. 6699].
--
FwdObserver (
talk)
23:36, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
This is a very nicely done article. I like how you have linked the Indian Army's activity to the other aspects of the war, placing it entirely in context. I might have appreciated knowing if there were internal political struggles going on, but perhaps that is another article entirely. I've made some very minor tweaks and grammar/punctuation fixes, nothing major, just to help with clarity and focus. Nicely done. Auntieruth55 ( talk) 19:26, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
I have serious reservations about the speedy award of GA status to this article right now! An article about a national army should at least also cover:
I sincerely believe that this is a GA or even an A-Class article. But it still needs some work, and we should not be submitting articles for peer review, and then promoting them in a parallel course to the review process! I have not reverted the GA status, but I urge you to consider the comments from the MilHist project.
Farawayman ( talk) 07:37, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
-- Vinay84 ( talk) 07:27, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Vinay, Farawayman has some valid criticisms that need to be addressed to prepare for A-level review; I agree that this article has some gaps that need to be filled before you try to take it that far.
ndian Mountain Artillery
and the war formed batteries
The Pioners regiments were all infantry who also undertook some building tasks -- Jim Sweeney ( talk) 21:05, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
So, lest you think this is done, it's not. :) But you've made a terrific start, and it appears that Farawayman is interested in helping you bring this along. Good luck!
The InfoBox at the start indicates pre-1914 and post-1918 engagements - Would it not be better to only list the colours awarded to the Indian regiments for WWI? Farawayman ( talk) 20:40, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
There was no Auxiliary Force as such until 1920, when the Auxiliary Force, India, was created from the Indian Defence Force, which was itself created in 1917 from the various Indian Volunteer Corps.
--
FwdObserver (
talk)
22:58, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Please post more photos of Indian soldiers in the European, African, Asian theaters of war. — Preceding unsigned comment added by F.desert ( talk • contribs) 06:12, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
I think it would be a good idea to rename the heading and the relevant text to British-Indian army. Otherwise, a wrong notion the current-day Indian army was involved in the war can creep in. Current day India is a totally different entity with a different national flag, national anthem, and much else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.201.250.149 ( talk) 05:17, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Indian Army | |
---|---|
Country | India |
Allegiance | British Empire |
Type | Army |
Size | 1,780,000 |
Engagements | World War I |
Gday. I can see this was discussed about 6 years ago but I think there is an issue with the infobox and that it may be time to re-examine the issue. Currently it seems to cover the entire period of the British Indian Army's existence; however, this article is about the organisation during World War I only so in my opinion the infobox should reflect that. Consider - at the moment the infobox includes battles both before and after World War I, whilst none of the notable commanders listed in the infobox commanded it during World War I either. As such I propose changing it to reflect World War I only (my proposed revised infobox would look something like this). Does anyone have any opinions or comments on this issue? Thanks. Anotherclown ( talk) 10:59, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
This article currently states: "In 1914, the Commander–in–Chief was General Sir Beauchamp Duff of the Indian Army,[15] and the Chief of the General Staff was Lieutenant General Sir Percy Lake of the British Army.[16]" I'm no expert on the British Indian Army so this may well be true (it certainly appears to be cited to reliable sources). However, this sentence seems to contradict the wiki articles on these two gentlemen. For instance the article on Beauchamp Duff states that he was "Chief of the General Staff in India from March 1906 to 1909" and that in 1914 he was as ADC General to HM the King (although this point isn't supported with a citation). Equally, the wiki article on Percy Lake states: he was "Chief of the General Staff in India from 1912." Meanwhile, our article on Commander-in-Chief, India states Beauchamp Duff was appointed to the posn in 1914, while Lake isn't even mentioned. The point is that one (or more) of these articles is incorrect. As such is someone with some knowledge of the topic possibly able to review this matter and confirm which is correct? Thanks again. Anotherclown ( talk) 11:13, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
Indian Army during World War I. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 22:58, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Indian Army during World War I. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:30, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Indian Army during World War I. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:18, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Indian Army during World War I. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:46, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
Where are the numbers of casualties taken from? No source is cited. Several internet articles cite those numbers but also give no source. The only other numbers I’ve seen are those given by the British Secretary of State for India in 1919 and they’re very different. Also the sentences describing the numbers are confused and don’t make sense: they appear to give two numbers for total deaths. Djewesbury ( talk) 22:41, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
Can someone please give a citation for the size of the Army given in the infobox. By 'size' is it referring to the peak combat strength at some given point in time, or the total who served during the entirety of the Great War. Searching for the figure only leads back to the Wikipedia article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.14.205.196 ( talk) 05:35, 7 October 2018 (UTC)