![]() | This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) 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. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I'm not sure who placed the neutrality template on this article but the second sentence which states "It began when British arrogance pushed the Nawabians (India) until the Nawabians attacked. " is a good example of what needs to be rewritten in this article. Is there a reference for such analysis? David D. (Talk) 23:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
In the section " First Wars," the first sentence was originally a sentence fragment, whose parentheses included that the French created and spread this rumor. This claim was unreferenced and a bit wordy, so I removed it. If anybody finds a truthful reference, they can add this claim back with a reference. - BlueCaper ( talk) 14:32, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
The article directly attributes fault to the Nawab of Bengal, characterizing him as rash/impetuous/scheming/unjust in his actions against a colonizing force, further framing the British as passive/reactors to aggression/victims. The article needs thorough decolonizing. 73.53.21.162 ( talk) 14:42, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
The explanatory paragraph is written with very poor grammar, does not provide an adequate explanation and doesn't really make sense.
The numbers in the info box are also wrong. 2A00:23C4:E220:3001:4D8B:FF6D:F65D:6633 ( talk) 19:45, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) 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. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I'm not sure who placed the neutrality template on this article but the second sentence which states "It began when British arrogance pushed the Nawabians (India) until the Nawabians attacked. " is a good example of what needs to be rewritten in this article. Is there a reference for such analysis? David D. (Talk) 23:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
In the section " First Wars," the first sentence was originally a sentence fragment, whose parentheses included that the French created and spread this rumor. This claim was unreferenced and a bit wordy, so I removed it. If anybody finds a truthful reference, they can add this claim back with a reference. - BlueCaper ( talk) 14:32, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
The article directly attributes fault to the Nawab of Bengal, characterizing him as rash/impetuous/scheming/unjust in his actions against a colonizing force, further framing the British as passive/reactors to aggression/victims. The article needs thorough decolonizing. 73.53.21.162 ( talk) 14:42, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
The explanatory paragraph is written with very poor grammar, does not provide an adequate explanation and doesn't really make sense.
The numbers in the info box are also wrong. 2A00:23C4:E220:3001:4D8B:FF6D:F65D:6633 ( talk) 19:45, 7 January 2023 (UTC)