Talk:Third Anglo-Maratha War

American English v. Other varieties

I have seen this issue come up in at least one other article on Wikipedia India related articles. I would prefer to keep the current American English despite this post from User:Ucucha [1]. Reasons:

• The article is fairly evolved and currently undergoing a GA review
• As far as I know, most Indian users may prefer American English. I know for a fact that most Indian users have their browsers and word processing tools set to American English when it comes to spell check and other preferences. Zuggernaut (talk) 21:51, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
  • The first point is irrelevant; that an article is developed is no excuse for it not following the Manual of Style. The second point is more interesting. I would have expected Indian English to use British, or Commonwealth, spellings, and Indian English#Idioms and popular words/phrases says the same. Ucucha 22:02, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Here's what the MoS says about an evolved/developed article: Wikipedia:TIES#Retaining_the_existing_variety.

I am not aware of any dictionary specifically made for "Indian English", at least not from any reputed publishing house. Indian English in itself may have numerous varieties depending on the state you are in. For Maharashtra, the state of relevance in this article, according to the Wikipedia article you point to, this would be "Minglish". This falls under WP:OR. Many or mostSome of the sources used in that article will not pass reliable sources test but there is a lot of original research in that article. Zuggernaut (talk) 22:20, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

I see this as a minor point but I am willing to change to British English if the majority feel so. My preference is American English. Zuggernaut (talk) 22:20, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

If you want to go with American English, all the dates will have to be changed as they use the British style (I changed them under the assumption that an article about India would use British English). I favour British English for the article as the British have strong national ties to India. See Wikipedia:MOS#Strong national ties to a topic. --Diannaa ^(Talk) 02:26, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

I noticed there's a template for Indian English - {{Indian English}} so I think it makes sense to switch to that version since this article had a lot of India-specific terminology like "lakh" for 100,000, Appa Saheb, Peshwa, etc and also because are similarities in the spellings in British and Indian English. Zuggernaut (talk) 15:48, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

EIC troops, numbers, label

EIC troops numbered about 150,000 for our time period of interest per the link provided in the GA review (Company rule in India#Army and civil service). Also, they are almost universally referred to as British in literature, even though they were of Indian nationality hired by EIC. Some times, particularly when giving casualties/number of dead, a distinction is made by several authors in stating that x number of dead were European, rest were Indian. Zuggernaut (talk) 16:01, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

This is a hard one they were employed by the EIC a British trading company and most accounts use British to describe them even when about 80%+ were Indians. We could use company troops which is accurate and gets around the problem of race.--Jim Sweeney (talk) 11:47, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

I have changed all references to "East India Company troops" Zuggernaut (talk) 06:23, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Good news - Third Anglo-Maratha War is now a GA!

On the successful assessment of this article as a Good Article, I want to thank all the users who've contributed to improving the article, particularly the following users:

AustralianRupert
Diannaa
Hchc2009
Jim Sweeney
Magicpiano
Redtigerxyz
Trfasulo
YellowMonkey

Thanks again for dedicating your precious time to look at this article! Zuggernaut (talk) 04:34, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Congrats. The main credit goes to you, Zuggernaut. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 04:45, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

No worries at all, happy to help. Thanks for your contribution. AustralianRupert (talk) 06:09, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Ditto - a pleasure. Hchc2009 (talk) 07:57, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Very nice of you to do this, by that I mean publicly express appreciation for the assistance of others. Thomas R. Fasulo (talk) 13:59, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Well done, I was glad to help. Magic♪piano 15:24, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorting references - tool

User:Svick has developed a tool for sorting references that use the {{citation}} template. It can be found here: [2] Saves a lot of time! Zuggernaut (talk) 01:34, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Malwa India 1823.png Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Malwa India 1823.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 02:39, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

What are 'Jahirnama' and 'farman'?

These terms are used in the penultimate paragraph of the 'Flight of the Peshwa' section. Although it seems obvious that they are some kind of edict, it might be useful to have them formally defined.1812ahill (talk) 17:56, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Problems with 'Events in Napur' section.

1: Raja Mansingh links to an article about someone who died in 1614. Clearly not the same fellow standing surety for Appu Sabeh in the 19th century. 2: Appu Sabeh is stated to have died in 1849 aged 44. That would place his birth year in 1805. Yet he murdered his cousin and signed a treaty with the British in 1816 aged 11? Surely that can't be right? 1812ahill (talk) 12:12, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Rectify the error

Hi, spelling of 'Maharashtra' is mis-spelled as 'Maharasthra' under Footnote Point No. 7. I am unable to rectify it. Could someone do that?

Jn045 (talk) 13:31, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Prelude and other sections

This section has cited reference Chhabra (2005). But the section reads like the problems Marathas faced were with them for centuries and not just recent developments. During the reign of Shivaji, some of the problems are irrelevant. During the reign of Peshawas until after the death of Madhavrao, the problems are irrelevant too. For example, the section states Marathas used to not know the local geography. How did the british know the local geography better than the locals? Another statement elsewhere in the article is that Peshawas sought help from the British to defeat Nizam who sought help from the French. Again Madhavrao had expressly declined assistance from British on the grounds that they are foreigners and he will deal with his local enemies on his own. In the section on growing power of British, the word Peshwa is used generically. One controversial statement is that an entire generation of marathas lay dead on the battlefied of Panipat. I have read the history of this battle and disagree with this statement. From the Peshawa family, two viz Sadashiv Bhau and Vishwas rao died in this battle. Nanasaheb Peshawa died en route to the battle field well before he reached there with reinforcements. Who were left from the Peshawa family? Raghunath rao, Madhavrao, Narayanrao. Holkar and Shindes also had many survivors; so how can it be an entire generation that gets killed? Need to change.Tkul (talk)Tkul —Preceding undated comment added 04:34, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

maratha people vs maratha caste

Dear Editors, I am not a major contributor to this page but I noticed on other pages that some people confuse maratha people (i.e. marathi people) with the maratha caste. So 'maratha warriors' does not necessarily refer to maratha caste. In fact, Brahmins have also been called maratha brahmins. Many times maratha and maharashtrian are used interchangeably by non-Maharashtrians to refer to all marathi speaking people irrespective of caste. Just saying that we need to be careful and understand the context. Thanks -Acharya63 (talk) 03:32, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Ranjit Singh added as Belligerent

This article has added Ranjit Singh as a belligerent. The grounds for this addition seem to be that Ranjit Singh sent troops to the Nizam, whom the latter then retained after not allowing them to return to Punjab. I do not see the connection of Ranjit Singh's soldiers staying past their original tenured contract which had no connection with the Third Maratha Anglo War, and that too by a decision made by the Nizam and not Ranjit Singh. The section makes on mention of dates of when the soldiers arrived, when their contract should have ran out, when the Nizam kept them on as personal soldiers and whether they were even used during the Anglo Maratha War. Unless someone can show how these two events are related by adding additional information (as the entire section has only one source which does not even mention any connection between Ranjit Singh, his soldiers and the Third Anglo Maratha War), I will be removing the entire section for lack of relevance. Ankhi88 (talk) 17:52, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Change in Name

Please change the name from Shivaji to Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj 60.254.0.32 (talk) 11:07, 19 December 2021 (UTC)