Talk:Second Battle of Panipat

Redundant lines removed

• Hemu's coronation. It is there in the background.
• Akbar being stationed away from the battle field. It is there in the sub-topic of the actual battle.
• Details of Humayun's death are unnecessary.
• The ruler was seeking to expel Mughals from India? More likely for the Delhi throne.
• Hemu's activities in Bengal.
• The title of Samrat is bestowed on a warrior who has not lost any war. This should come on the page for 'Samrat'
• That Hemu started coins in his name and appointed many Hindus at important positions. Should be on the page for Hemu.
• 'thus changing history' (after his eye was struck by an arrow)

Salilb (talk) 20:27, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Bollywood as a source?

Why the heck is this reading according to the Bollywood film Jodhaa Akbar? Akbar gladly hacked away at Hemu, but being a lad was unable to remove his head. Thus, Bairam Khan obliged and took off his head.

No sources are given so you should promptly cite a stupid Bollywood movie as your source if you're going to write such fallacy.

I'll provide more accurate details with sources soon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.29.72.61 (talk) 23:48, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

NPOV

This article is blind sided Hemu page. It says about Hemu only and how great he was... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.120.73.18 (talk) 13:04, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

It seems like one of the user is intent on giving this a hindu vs muslim colour. There have been alliances between Hindu kings and muslim kings. Muslim kings have fought each other, so giving a Hindu-muslim colour is unjustified.Air Warrior (talk) 13:46, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:First Battle of Panipat which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 16:47, 25 October 2024 (UTC)