Talk:Siege of Sirhind

Sir plz improve the article Battle of Sirhind in place of siege of Sirhind. the article is fake plz improve it .i have a source .of Battles and Sieges,page=948|author= Jacques, Tony,publisher=Greenwood Press,isbn=978-0-313-33536-5

please check the above source and edit relevant information fr the readers. Shah439 (talk) 04:38, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

According to Tony Jaques, "Sikh leader Banda Singh Bahadur 's ragged peasant army succeeded in an attack on the a mughal city of Samana, then besieged Sirhind in Punjab...". Looks like a siege to me. --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:11, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sir this is not an article of Siege it was a battle in which Sikhs conquered Sirhind killing mughal leader Wazir Khan (Sirhind). Fateh Burj see this . and also page number 948 Shah439 (talk) 08:18, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If it was an article of siege then why not the result of the battle is sikhs defeated and killed wazir Khan and massacred his army and stormed and sacked Sirhind. See in the book source pg 948. thank you Shah439 (talk) 08:21, 24 April 2015 (UTC) Shah439 (talk) 08:21, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Shah439, you recently deleted some sourced material. What is the reason behind this? Xtremedood (talk) 10:01, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Becoz that was source less thank you Xtremedood Shah439 (talk) 10:05, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No. The source was indicated. See: Rajmohan Gandhi, Revenge and Reconciliation, p. 117-118. Xtremedood (talk) 20:57, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Revenge and Reconciliation says Banda killed all the town and burned all but Sikhism its Philosophy and History says that Banda was slaughtering the town but ordered his army to stop when a Hindu came begging for mercy saving the town and its people. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 19:19, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sikhism: Its Philosophy and History (

ISBN 9788185815039) is published by the Institute of Sikh Studies. Its neutrality must be questioned in regard to this topic. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:44, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Ok agreed but that doesn't mean everything it says should be removed. Only parts which we know are bias like what they say happened after the battle. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 19:48, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The book's description of the battle is heavily skewed to the Sikh perspective. Clearly, the Sikhs won the battle, but without better, more neutral sources, we have no idea if any of the heroism attributed to the Sikhs is valid. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:58, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 20:06, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MehmoodS I did a little digging on him and the only thing I could find about him is that he "He served the Punjab Education Department for thirty-four years, first as a senior Lecturer and then as a Principal." on the site "Singh Bros". First it's unclear what Punjab Education Department is, secondly his book that was provided was published by Singh Bros. Other than I could not find anything else about him, his credentials, education or experience. I would say it's kind of iffy to include his commentary on this article as he does not appear to be any reputable authority on history. Kamhiri (talk) 23:15, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have provided the information. There is nothing iffy. Here is the link on him: [1]. "Prof. Surjit Singh Gandhi is a known authority on the History of Sikhs.". MehmoodS (talk) 23:48, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Acknowleged, I'd still consider him an iffy source as the only information available about him is Singh Bros who may be incentivized to puff up their author's achievements, and Singh Bros isn't really a reliable publisher at all. Kamhiri (talk) 23:50, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some information can be enough information. And Singh Bros is a reputable publisher, prominent company engaged in the publication and distribution of Sikh Books and Punjabi Literature Books. MehmoodS (talk) 23:54, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What I mean by reliable publisher is that the author's work is peer reviewed by other authorities in the field that the book's topic is about and/or has a reputation as an academic publisher such Routledge, Brill etc. Singh Bros is neither of those things. Kamhiri (talk) 00:28, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Many writers have used him and his books as references such as Historians like Dr. Harbans Sagoo, Professor John Hinnells have used him as reference in their books. MehmoodS (talk) 00:40, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So I've just looked at Sagoo's page 138 onwards where the citations are and she does seem to cite Gandhi once out of the many, many citations there. However, I'm still uncomfortable with using Gandhi as a standalone secondary source, if his work is listed as a source within an another reliable secondary school that's fine though. I don't think an agreement will be reached, so I would recommend pinging an experienced third editor (not someone either you or I have had previous rapport/interaction with for neutrality purposes) on this talk page to get their opinion. I'll accept the third editor's opinion regarding the inclusion of Gandhi's commentary. Thanks Kamhiri (talk) 00:52, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

what uncomfortable? His source has been widely used by many scholars, even Rishi Singh (PhD from the Department of History at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London, UK.) in his book State Formation and the Establishment of Non-Muslim Hegemony: Post-Mughal 19th-century Punjab. There is no question about this source. You are welcome to get 3rd opinion. MehmoodS (talk) 01:20, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Read the sources by Jacques, Dhavan's OUP, NCH, Hari Ram Gupta and Ganda Singh's source; a siege encompasses storming, sacking, razing of a city. 00:00, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

After the siege is successful which itself is a battle and after successful conquest follows sacking, razing of a city. MehmoodS (talk) 00:23, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I will accept the opinion of a third user in regards to this. Kamhiri (talk) 01:01, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Forget to mention for any laymen 3rd editor, [Battle of Chappar Chiri] article is the actual battle article that immediately precedes this siege, so this siege is supposed to be about not the combat between the Mughals and the Sikhs, but the seizure, sacking and razing of the city after the Mughals had already fled and were defeated in the battle of chappar chiri.Kamhiri (talk) 02:37, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should go through the citations again which details the siege where Mughal soldiers fought the battle to protect the city but after the gates were broke open, many Mughal soldiers were killed and others fled. Therefore, the city was captured. And AFTER the capture, sacking and razing too place. MehmoodS (talk) 02:47, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal, as per the definition of siege [2] an OUP book published in 2020. Quote: "A siege can be said to be include all attempts to assault a defined fortification as well as certain amount of liminal fighting along the wall's margins and minor attacks on the besieger's camp".

We separate the second paragraph currently in the siege section and under the new heading "Capture". We expand on the siege section

"After the victory of the Sikhs in the Battle of Chappar Chiri, Banda Singh Bahadur and and his forces began their march to Sirhind, roughly 10 miles from the battle field. The gates of the city were closed, and the guns mounted on the wall's forts maintained steady fire on the Sikhs and managed to inflict considerable losses upon them. During the siege, people who were left behind were taken as prisoners, most notable among them was Sucha Nand, the Hindu peshkar of Wazir Khan. Only the Muslims who had disguised and hid themselves in the houses of the Hindus managed to escape injury. Fighting resumed on May 13, the fort guns had managed to kill 500 of Banda's troops, in response the Sikhs fired a deadly volley on the fort gun, rendering it useless and attacked the city's gates, sucessfully managing to open some of them. Banda's troops entered the city on 14th May." as per Ganda Singh's Life of Banda Singh Bahadur and Sagoo's source. The "Aftermath" section stays as is in this proposal. Kamhiri (talk) 19:04, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First of all thank you for going through citations. "Capture" section after "Siege" is fine by moving and including the second paragraph from the siege section. BUT the above content isn't in order because after the capture of Sirhind, following happened "Sucha Nand was captured alive and later executed, whereas other Hindus who contributed to the crimes of Wazir Khan were punished". So this should be included under section "Capture" as well, on top like this "After the conquest of Sirhind....." Also for the siege section, you can additionally include citation by Sagoo as she provides same information. And finally yes, Aftermath section can stay as is. MehmoodS (talk) 23:30, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Present the primary sources (sourced to secondary sources) that had covered the aftermath of the siege.

A Source X, drafted by a Sikh (c. ?) in Persian, claims BCD. In contrast, another source Y drafted by a Mughal chronicler in Persian around the same time, claims DEF. And so on...

Then, present the views of scholars on these primary sources.

Historians Alpha and Beta suggests that source Y shall not be accepted at face-value, since .... Historian Gamma supports such analysis and points to the undamaged existence of major tombs. And so on ....

The current sub-section on atrocities makes for an atrocious reading. TrangaBellam (talk) 19:15, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

TB, could you please provide a Wiki policy/guideline/prominent explanatory essay or other wikiresource that guides editors on how to write a section like this. Thanks. Other questions: you removed an OUP source on the sparing of Islamic tombs during the siege which seems a bit unnecessary as we want high quality sources that backs content up; and you claimed Sagoo is not a reliable source in the edit summaries, yet you left her criticism of Khan and Latif up. Could you please explain? Kamhiri (talk) 19:38, 15 May 2022 (UTC) Kamhiri (talk) 19:31, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]