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:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to
Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please
join the project where you can contribute to the
discussions and help with our
open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Azerbaijan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Azerbaijan-related topics 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.AzerbaijanWikipedia:WikiProject AzerbaijanTemplate:WikiProject AzerbaijanAzerbaijan articles
This article is within the scope of
WikiProject Caucasia, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CaucasiaWikipedia:WikiProject CaucasiaTemplate:WikiProject CaucasiaCaucasia articles
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
[[Petroleum industry in Azerbaijan#First oil boom|Baku oil fields]] The anchor (#First oil boom) is no longer available because it was
deleted by a user before.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors
I've been adding material in the sandbox courtesy of Bean but will need to wait until OH Meso IV arrives (£5 plus postage the hardback!)
Keith-264 (
talk)
22:45, 18 November 2015 (UTC)reply
I remember vaguely noticing the British Empire entry in the infobox and doing nothing about it. I'm not sure about the second notable commander now, I didn't notice his name in the sources so I'll revisit once OH Meso IV arrives.
Keith-264 (
talk)
19:48, 22 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Thanks, I managed to forget Erickson (!) but have added details of Ottoman moves from him. It's nice to have a source a mere 14 years old to consult.;O)
Keith-264 (
talk)
14:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Name of Iran/Persia
There is no need to put this discussion in the main article, as it does not relate to the subject of the article at all. The article is about a particular military expedition. The country concerned was called Persia at that time. Today it is called Iran. A long explanation about the name should not appear in the body of the article, as it is distracting and not directly relevant. It should appear in a footnote, if at all.
If there is a consensus among modern historians about which term should be used when discussing historical events, then that should be used. Otherwise 'Persia' would seem to make more sense up to the time the name was changed.
That's just your opinion man. The name of the place surely matters in an encyclopaedia and since there can be confusion and ignorance over it, the lead is the place to mention it. Thanks for asking.
Keith-264 (
talk)
15:16, 18 February 2017 (UTC)reply
I reverted your edit (by mistake because I changed my mind half-way through a rollback but it was too late.) because consensus had not been established. The disputed passage is not a discussion it is a description. I am happy to incorporate the wikilink but it needs a gloss. Perhaps
Name of Iran and a sentence? The article is helpful but lacks citations so we have to be careful not to use it as a source. OK?
Keith-264 (
talk)
08:29, 19 February 2017 (UTC)reply
I have just modified one external link on
Dunsterforce. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.
The section headed "casualties" is truly bizarre. Just one Canadian officer worthy of mention? - Surely an insult to all the others who died? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
94.173.221.115 (
talk)
09:14, 9 November 2018 (UTC)reply