Talk:Battle of Broken Hill
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Battle of Broken Hill 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 |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
Letter from the Ottoman Sultan
editI'm not sure of the rules here, but in the "Aftermath" section this article refers to a letter "from the Ottoman Sultan" being considered a forgery by Turkish sources, but there is no mention of a letter from the Ottoman Sultan anywhere else in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:44B8:2AF:DA04:C82D:9263:E623:1BE8 (talk) 04:34, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
Now there is something relevant.--Skylax30 (talk) 20:48, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Almost four years later and this is still not clear. "The attackers left notes connecting their actions to the hostilities between the Ottoman and British Empires, which had been officially declared in October 1914. Believing he would be killed, Gool Mahomed left a letter in his waist-belt which stated that he was a subject of the Ottoman Sultan and that, "I must kill you and give my life for my faith, Allāhu Akbar." Mullah Abdullah said in his last letter that he was dying for his faith and in obedience to the order of the Sultan, "but owing to my grudge against Chief Sanitary Inspector Brosnan it was my intention to kill him first."[10] Turkish sources claim that the letter from the Ottoman Sultan was a forgery, and that the Turkish flag found with the perpetrators was planted. It is claimed that the incident was attributed to Turks in order to rally the Australian public for the war." If the letter from the Ottoman Sultan refers to the letter in Gool's belt, then the first sentence needs to be rephrased. As presently written, it implies that this letter was written by Gool himself. Not to mention the confusing reference to him as Gool Mahomed, when he was previously identified as Mahommed Gool. Both the order of the names and the spelling are different. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 12:13, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
Naming Pakistan as their origin to create perception
editIt seems very convenient for naming Pakistan as the Modern day representation of the people. Its creating negative perception when it is not required and only naming British India would suffice. -- 05:07, 14 January 2019 MobyQ