Talk:Kalinga War - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 128.83.206.89 (talk) at 21:13, 14 October 2010. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 21:13, 14 October 2010 by 128.83.206.89 (talk)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

India: Odisha / History C‑class Mid‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Odisha (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as High-importance).

Military history: Asian / Indian / South Asia / Classical Start‑class

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

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	Indian military history task force
	South Asian military history task force
	Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC – c. 500 AD)

WP:INDIA Banner/Orissa Addition

Note: {{WP India}} Project Banner with Orissa workgroup parameters was added to this article talk page because the article falls under Category:Orissa or its subcategories. Should you feel this addition is inappropriate , please undo my changes and update/remove the relavent categories to the article -- Amartyabag 02:58, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

strength..........

600,000 infantry ???? are you serious ? were they logistically capable to concentrate 600,000 men ? after u dont just gather men for fighting u have to feed them as well ! and sustaining 600,000 standing army is seriously a blind trust on primary sources, that were famous for exaggerations. so is there any one to take notice of it ? or u guys happy with fantacy size of kalinga troops !

keep in mind that before 13th century A.D concentrating troops more then 150,000 was logistically impossible, although any nation could posses a lot more "fighting people" but to concentrate them and organize them as an army was a totally different task. الله أكبرMohammad Adil 08:35, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

You seem to be disregarding the fact that Kalinga was fighting in its own territory.Also, it is very likely that these were militia rather than well trained soldiers.Also, check Battle of Changping

BTW, what happened in 13th century A.D?

Vinay84 (talk) 10:07, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Bias

one of the most just ruler (sic) that India etc... The Contributor of this paragraph is so enamored with the subject that it's wholly unacceptable to be left as it stands. This section of the article needs a serious rewrite with attention to report facts rather than the perceptions of a biased writer. If this is to be a credible source for the preservation of knowledge rather than a cesspool ruled by libel and editorializing then articles such as this can not be deemed acceptable for public consumption. I recommend a complete rewrite to be undertaken by someone with more knowledge on the subject than I posses, and who shares my passion for the accurate dissemination of information.

Categories: