Talk:Battle of the Hydaspes River
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Many dead" sounds a little amatuer....could someone correct this and maybe make it sound a little better please? -Colin MacDonald
It is interesting to note that this page claims that "His tired army saw the use of elephants for the first time in war," when the War elephant page states that the Battle of Gaugamela was possibly the first European encounter with elephants, and the Gaugamela page does state that 50 elephants were involved on the Persian side. The Battle of the Hydaspes River is listed as occuring in 326 b.c. vs. the Gaugamela battle in 331 b.c. It seems like the Hydaspes River page may need some correction.
Howard C. Shaw III--68.213.34.248 18:52, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- I actually kept the summary from the previous portion, but see the second paragraph of the "Aftermath" section for the discussion on War elephants. Basically, I have not seen any description of Gaugamela that included anything about the war elephants other than the fact that they were there. Maybe the elephants didn't charge? They definitely did charge in this battle. - Vina 19:18, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I think that "Hydaspes" should redirect to the Battle of the Hydaspes River instead of an article about the Hydaspes river. The river itself is little known. Axeman89 00:45, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Infantry
The table at the top of the article mentions that Alexander's army had 5000 infantry, while the article mentions 50,000 infantry. Which is the correct number? --ashwatha 19:45, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Dates in battle page names
I moved the page back to the original name. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Battles no need for date in name unless as a disambiguation.
If you wish the page name to include the year and it is not for disambiguation, please discuss it under Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Battles#Dates in battle page names --Philip Baird Shearer 10:56, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] To: Anon editor
Please don't attempt to rewrite history. If you wish to present a minority view, then please don't attempt to pass it off as the truth. For all your reverts, you haven't come up with a better and more reliable source for this claim. And your edits are not NPOV. Idleguy 17:45, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Greco-Indian Kingdom
Shouldn't that get any mention at all? At least there should be a link to the wikipedia article on it in the see also section.
Categories: Greek articles | B-Class Greek articles needing review | B-Class Greek articles | Unknown-importance Greek articles | WikiProject Greece | B-Class military history articles needing review | B-Class Indian military history articles | Indian military history task force articles | B-Class Classical warfare articles | Classical warfare task force articles | B-Class military history articles | B-Class Pakistan articles | High-importance Pakistan articles | Pakistan articles about unknown subject of Pakistan | WikiProject Indian history articles | B-Class Indian history articles | Unknown-importance Indian history articles | B-Class India articles | B-Class India articles of High-importance | High-importance India articles