This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Muhammad of Ghor 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 |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
Muhammad of Ghor was nominated as a History good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (December 23, 2023, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
India,
Pakistan, and
Afghanistan, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other talk page banners | |||||||
|
Re:Packer and Tracker: I hope you don't mind, but I am making a quick prose and coherence check in the lead so that your passage through the GA will be smoother. All the best, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 18:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
The use of the word desecrated in the sentence "After a general massacre of the populace, the Ghurids desecrated the Hindu pilgrim centre of Benaras" seems bit out of place. I do realize that Benaras suffered destruction, but I understood that it was general destruction, looting, etc. The source cited says "In 1194, Muizzuddin returned to India. He crossed the Jamuna with 50,000 cavalry and moved towards Kanauj. A hotly contested battle between Muizzuddin and Jaichandra was fought at Chandawar near Kanauj. We are told that Jaichandra had almost carried the day when he was killed by an arrow, and his army was totally defeated. Muizzuddin now moved on to Banaras which was ravaged, a large number of temples there being destroyed ..." I think that the emphasis on desecration in the Wikipedia text is misplaced. It seems to me more appropriate to say, "Following the battle, the Ghurids took the fort at Asni, where they plundered the royal treasure of the Gahadavalas, and went on to take the pilgrimage city of Benaras, which was looted and a large number of its temples destroyed." The cited source does not mention a "general massacre". The chronology seems to be that the fort at Asni was taken and then Benaras was looted (sacked). (q.v. here and here) I have made this change based on the source in an effort to make the article more GA worthy. -- Bejnar ( talk) 21:12, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
(great slaughter literally means a massacre)As usual the contemporary literary works indulge in gross exaggerations. They place Jai Chand's army at 80,000 men in armour, 30,000 horses....... Jai Chand who is known to be a great warrior, suffered a disastrous defeat.
After great slaughter and plunder, the fort of Asni which contained the Gahadavala treasure-house was plundered...
Indian sourcesand further labelling them as
POVsources is derogatory, more so in the case where the cited sources are from eminent historians of the modern era like as Sunil Kumar, Satish Chandra, K.A. Nizami, Md. Habib et al..
I highly recommend anyone interested in this article to comment on Wikipedia talk:NCROY#Other pages for disambiguation. This ruler's predecessor is also a Muhammad and bears the same regnal name of another state. If that article is moved to something like "Muhammad of the Ghurids", then it will more or less the same as this article. My suggestion is to move this article to Mu'izz al-Din Muhammad, which already redirects here, and I guess there is no other ruler with that name. Aintabli ( talk) 17:00, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Sangsangaplaz ( talk · contribs) 14:04, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
In the 'Early Years' section there is a redundant subsection called 'Title' while the previous subsection is called 'Name and Title'. They should be combined. Sangsangaplaz ( talk) 06:27, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
Or one or both of them should be renamed if appropriate. Sangsangaplaz ( talk) 06:27, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
The article uses a lot of words which is hard for users to understand such as 'condominium' (which is modernly used for apartments) and use of words to watch which can ruin the encyclopedic feel of the article. I will try to fix as much as I can though I will not make any major edits and i will make only minor edits. Sangsangaplaz ( talk) 06:27, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
Since this article meets all the criteria, when the above problems are addressed I will pass this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sangsangaplaz ( talk • contribs) 07:08, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
@ Sangsangaplaz:The issues you pointed out above has been fixed now, could you please point out other minor issues ? Re Pa©ker&Tra©ker (♀) 02:41, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
@ Re Packer: I recommend renaming the aforementioned section to something more appropriate. Then this article is a pass.
@ Sangsangaplaz: I did renamed it to the best it suits the content in the section which includs his birth year and title, though could you suggest anything more "appropriate"? Re Pa©ker&Tra©ker (♀) 19:12, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Please create an overview section on Sources and their follies, biases, etc.; see Nezak_Huns#Sources for a guide.
His name is variously transliterated as Muizuddin Sam, Shihabuddin Ghuri, Muhammad Ghori and Muhammad of Ghor.
According to the Tabaqat-i-Nasiri, his birth name was "Muhammad" which is vernacularly spelt as "Hamad" by the Ghurids.
During his childhood, his mother used to call him "Zangi" due to his dark skin tone.
After the coronation in Ghazna, he styled himself as "Malik Shihabuddin" and after his occupation of Khurasan, he took the title of "Muizzuddin" or "Mu'izz al-Din".
The synchronous accounts ...
However, their efficient administration of the province, made him doubtful of their uprise and seeing a possible challenge to his own authority, he ordered his nephews to be imprisoned in the castle of Gharjistan.[8] Although, they were released from the captivity by his son Sayf al-Din Muhammad after the death of his father in 1161.
However, Ala al-Din soon grew wary of the brothers' increasing sway over the provinces and fearing an usurpation, had them imprisoned in the castle of Gharjistan. They would only be released ....
Sayf al-Din, later died in a battle against the nomadic Oghuzs of Balkh.
After their release from the captivity, "Tarik-i-Firishtah" states that the Ghurid siblings were reinstated in Sanjah, although the earlier account of "Tabaqat-i-Nasiri" stated that the hardship continued due to their financial conditions. Muhammad thus, took shelter in the court of his uncle Fakhruddin Masud who held the principality of Bamiyan as vassal of their uncle Alauddin Husayn.
Later, Fakhr al-Din Masud laid his own claim for the succession after Sayf al-Din death as the elder member of the Ghurid family.
After Sayf al-Din died, Fakhr al-Din Masud claimed the throne by virtue of being the eldest among the Ghurid clan.
Muhammad helped his brother in suppressing the revolt of Fakhruddin ...
his brother succeeded Sayf al-Din to the throne in 1163 and initially placed Muhammad as a minor officer in his court, which result in him retiring (unhappy with his position) to the court of Sistan where he spend a whole season.
unhappy with his positiondoes not make much sense esp. as a bracketed appelation. Is it your aim to convey that Muhammad did migrate to the Court of Sistan but without resigning from his brother's Court? Such a conveyal seems anachronistic, though.
Whole season- an year?
However, later Ghiyath-al din sent an envoy to brought him back who subsequently placed him in charge of the southern part of the Ghurid domains which possibly included Istiyan and Kajuran.
FAIL as of now. TrangaBellam ( talk) 06:55, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Indian campaigns of Muhammad of Ghor#Requested move 11 February 2024 that may be of interest to watchers of this page. Schierbecker ( talk) 17:28, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
The leader of khokhars was Ram lal khokhar who was a Jats and also khokhar were jats who assassinated him so please change it Samarth099 ( talk) 04:21, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Muhammad of Ghor 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 |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
Muhammad of Ghor was nominated as a History good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (December 23, 2023, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
India,
Pakistan, and
Afghanistan, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other talk page banners | |||||||
|
Re:Packer and Tracker: I hope you don't mind, but I am making a quick prose and coherence check in the lead so that your passage through the GA will be smoother. All the best, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 18:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
The use of the word desecrated in the sentence "After a general massacre of the populace, the Ghurids desecrated the Hindu pilgrim centre of Benaras" seems bit out of place. I do realize that Benaras suffered destruction, but I understood that it was general destruction, looting, etc. The source cited says "In 1194, Muizzuddin returned to India. He crossed the Jamuna with 50,000 cavalry and moved towards Kanauj. A hotly contested battle between Muizzuddin and Jaichandra was fought at Chandawar near Kanauj. We are told that Jaichandra had almost carried the day when he was killed by an arrow, and his army was totally defeated. Muizzuddin now moved on to Banaras which was ravaged, a large number of temples there being destroyed ..." I think that the emphasis on desecration in the Wikipedia text is misplaced. It seems to me more appropriate to say, "Following the battle, the Ghurids took the fort at Asni, where they plundered the royal treasure of the Gahadavalas, and went on to take the pilgrimage city of Benaras, which was looted and a large number of its temples destroyed." The cited source does not mention a "general massacre". The chronology seems to be that the fort at Asni was taken and then Benaras was looted (sacked). (q.v. here and here) I have made this change based on the source in an effort to make the article more GA worthy. -- Bejnar ( talk) 21:12, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
(great slaughter literally means a massacre)As usual the contemporary literary works indulge in gross exaggerations. They place Jai Chand's army at 80,000 men in armour, 30,000 horses....... Jai Chand who is known to be a great warrior, suffered a disastrous defeat.
After great slaughter and plunder, the fort of Asni which contained the Gahadavala treasure-house was plundered...
Indian sourcesand further labelling them as
POVsources is derogatory, more so in the case where the cited sources are from eminent historians of the modern era like as Sunil Kumar, Satish Chandra, K.A. Nizami, Md. Habib et al..
I highly recommend anyone interested in this article to comment on Wikipedia talk:NCROY#Other pages for disambiguation. This ruler's predecessor is also a Muhammad and bears the same regnal name of another state. If that article is moved to something like "Muhammad of the Ghurids", then it will more or less the same as this article. My suggestion is to move this article to Mu'izz al-Din Muhammad, which already redirects here, and I guess there is no other ruler with that name. Aintabli ( talk) 17:00, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Sangsangaplaz ( talk · contribs) 14:04, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
In the 'Early Years' section there is a redundant subsection called 'Title' while the previous subsection is called 'Name and Title'. They should be combined. Sangsangaplaz ( talk) 06:27, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
Or one or both of them should be renamed if appropriate. Sangsangaplaz ( talk) 06:27, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
The article uses a lot of words which is hard for users to understand such as 'condominium' (which is modernly used for apartments) and use of words to watch which can ruin the encyclopedic feel of the article. I will try to fix as much as I can though I will not make any major edits and i will make only minor edits. Sangsangaplaz ( talk) 06:27, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
Since this article meets all the criteria, when the above problems are addressed I will pass this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sangsangaplaz ( talk • contribs) 07:08, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
@ Sangsangaplaz:The issues you pointed out above has been fixed now, could you please point out other minor issues ? Re Pa©ker&Tra©ker (♀) 02:41, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
@ Re Packer: I recommend renaming the aforementioned section to something more appropriate. Then this article is a pass.
@ Sangsangaplaz: I did renamed it to the best it suits the content in the section which includs his birth year and title, though could you suggest anything more "appropriate"? Re Pa©ker&Tra©ker (♀) 19:12, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Please create an overview section on Sources and their follies, biases, etc.; see Nezak_Huns#Sources for a guide.
His name is variously transliterated as Muizuddin Sam, Shihabuddin Ghuri, Muhammad Ghori and Muhammad of Ghor.
According to the Tabaqat-i-Nasiri, his birth name was "Muhammad" which is vernacularly spelt as "Hamad" by the Ghurids.
During his childhood, his mother used to call him "Zangi" due to his dark skin tone.
After the coronation in Ghazna, he styled himself as "Malik Shihabuddin" and after his occupation of Khurasan, he took the title of "Muizzuddin" or "Mu'izz al-Din".
The synchronous accounts ...
However, their efficient administration of the province, made him doubtful of their uprise and seeing a possible challenge to his own authority, he ordered his nephews to be imprisoned in the castle of Gharjistan.[8] Although, they were released from the captivity by his son Sayf al-Din Muhammad after the death of his father in 1161.
However, Ala al-Din soon grew wary of the brothers' increasing sway over the provinces and fearing an usurpation, had them imprisoned in the castle of Gharjistan. They would only be released ....
Sayf al-Din, later died in a battle against the nomadic Oghuzs of Balkh.
After their release from the captivity, "Tarik-i-Firishtah" states that the Ghurid siblings were reinstated in Sanjah, although the earlier account of "Tabaqat-i-Nasiri" stated that the hardship continued due to their financial conditions. Muhammad thus, took shelter in the court of his uncle Fakhruddin Masud who held the principality of Bamiyan as vassal of their uncle Alauddin Husayn.
Later, Fakhr al-Din Masud laid his own claim for the succession after Sayf al-Din death as the elder member of the Ghurid family.
After Sayf al-Din died, Fakhr al-Din Masud claimed the throne by virtue of being the eldest among the Ghurid clan.
Muhammad helped his brother in suppressing the revolt of Fakhruddin ...
his brother succeeded Sayf al-Din to the throne in 1163 and initially placed Muhammad as a minor officer in his court, which result in him retiring (unhappy with his position) to the court of Sistan where he spend a whole season.
unhappy with his positiondoes not make much sense esp. as a bracketed appelation. Is it your aim to convey that Muhammad did migrate to the Court of Sistan but without resigning from his brother's Court? Such a conveyal seems anachronistic, though.
Whole season- an year?
However, later Ghiyath-al din sent an envoy to brought him back who subsequently placed him in charge of the southern part of the Ghurid domains which possibly included Istiyan and Kajuran.
FAIL as of now. TrangaBellam ( talk) 06:55, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Indian campaigns of Muhammad of Ghor#Requested move 11 February 2024 that may be of interest to watchers of this page. Schierbecker ( talk) 17:28, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
The leader of khokhars was Ram lal khokhar who was a Jats and also khokhar were jats who assassinated him so please change it Samarth099 ( talk) 04:21, 25 May 2024 (UTC)