Talk:Umayyad campaigns in India

Battle of Navsari was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 21 December 2023 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Umayyad campaigns in India. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Umayyad campaigns in India article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 3 months

This article was nominated for deletion on 30 April 2015. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Military history: Asian / South Asia

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	South Asian military history task force

India: History Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article was last assessed in April 2015.

Pakistan Mid‑importance

	Pakistan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Pakistani history.

A member of the Guild of Copy Editors, Dthomsen8, reviewed a version of this article for copy editing on May 2015. However, a major copy edit was inappropriate at that time because of the issues specified below, or the other tags now found on this article. Once these issues have been addressed, and any related tags have been cleared, please tag the article once again for {{copyedit}}. The Guild welcomes all editors with a good grasp of English. Visit our project page if you are interested in joining!
Please address the following issues as well as any other cleanup tags before re-tagging this article with copyedit: awaiting deletion decision

Removing Irrelevant Stuff

As the Article is About Ummayad Campaigns than there Shouldn't be Mention of the Raids Happened in Rashidun or Abbasid Eram Ummayad Campaigns Timeline was Between 711 & 740 DeepstoneV (talk) 09:15, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is in the Background section. Do you understand what "Background" means? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:45, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The background section, I would say it is a clear mess. The article is clearly not "Arab campaigns in India". It is the campaigns launched by the Umayyads. And do you understand what the section "Background" uses for? The section is completely made up with campaigns launched by Arabs in pre-Umayyad era. I find no logic in the presentation of those in that section. Imperial ^[AFCND] 17:53, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moreover, it feels something off by adding the raid against the Chalukyas, conducted by the Rashidun, but ignoring the conquest of particularly conducted by the Umayyads against Sindh in the infobox. Are we supposed to take modern India as reference to the article? Imperial ^[AFCND] 18:01, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the Background section got bloated over the years. Please feel free to cut it down. Some naval raids happened, which should be happened as part of the background. That is all. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:26, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think @DeepstoneV was talking about removing Rashidun related things from the infobox. I've divided the background section now. Imperial ^[AFCND] 00:01, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, those naval raids do form the background. But the section shouldn't be as detailed as it currently is. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 02:04, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is Another Topic But Could you please explain why the Arab conquest of Sindh is not mentioned in this article? I understand that the article focuses on India, but as a country, India did not exist back then; rather, it refers to the entire subcontinent during that time. Other than that there is Seriously No Need to mentioned Rashidun era raids in Background if u mentioned Sindh Campaign as Backgroubd DeepstoneV (talk) 06:10, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is how this page evolved. Originally it was called the "Battle of Rajasthan". It was a little known subject then, and gradually it got developed. I don't see why this needs to be combined with Sindh. Sindh was decisively occupied and the Caliphate stayed there. The Indian kingdoms were taken for a while and then lost. The histories are quite different. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:35, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If the Page Is evolved Now, than Its Must Need to Kept the Sindh one too At the End they Were also Ruled by A Indian (Subcontinent) Dynasty DeepstoneV (talk) 04:52, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article is completely based on Kingdoms that covered modern Indian areas. For Sindh, we have a seperate article of Umayyad conquest of Sindh. So let's keep this as current way. Imperial ^[AFCND] 05:53, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

India as a Nation didnt existed backthan, Saying this Again. And if this is the case than why Hindus Shahis Are Mentioned in Ghaznavid campaigns in India because they didn't ruled Mordern day's India and Seperate articles on them are present too.

If this Article is just covering Mordern day India's Kingdoms than their is no need to Add Karkota dynasty as it started in Mordern day's Pakistan. Ummayad conquest of Sindh is itself part of Ummayad campaigns in India DeepstoneV (talk) 07:11, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Saindava and Pulakeshin II

Later in 776 CE, a naval expedition by the Arabs was defeated by the Saindhava naval fleet under Agguka I - this happened during the Abbasid Caliphate and should not be included in the Ummayyad campaigns. "A Concise History Of Karnataka ( From Pre Historic Times To The Present) by Suryanath, Kamath and Heroic Hindu Resistance To Muslim Invaders 636 AD 1206 AD by Sita Ram Goel does not site any primary sources - so are opinions. These references are added where scholars think the arab raids were a failure.Maglorbd (talk) 08:15, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]