Talk:Second Anglo-Afghan War

message: They seem to be in the picture, and the war is in their honours, but they don't seem to be in the order of battle. 174.112.18.193 (talk) 03:44, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  92nd Highlanders 

message: Why an Afghan victory? Just asking, as it's in the box, but nothing I know (and nothing in the text), really supports such a one-sided summary.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.185.146.90 (talk) 17:07, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Afghan victory? 

message: The second and third Anglo-Afghan wars were fought between the Afghans and the British Empire - not the UK - all articles on the subject need correcting.
Temperamental1 (talk) 11:57, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Belligerent - 'Unite Kingdom' 

message: Not a single word about the British duplicity, incompetence and brutality. No word of Auckland, Elphinstone, McNaughten, Burnes, Sale and a host of other British. No word of the Russians either, nor of their Polish unofficial envoy whose simple presence started the entire Anglo-Afghan disaster.
This article is too brief for such a huge and important topic whose ramifications continue to this day.
You could start by reading "The Return of the King" by William Dalrymple, and follow his key references.Historygypsy (talk) 12:49, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a page for the Second Anglo-Afghan War (1878-80), you're talking about the First Afghan War (1839-42) which is the one 'Return of the King' deals with. Of course, the second war was influenced by the first, but the Fist Afghan War page can be referenced for that history.  Tybaltstone (talk) 22:50, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not complete by far 

message: From his Midlothian campaign: Remember the rights of the savage, as we call him. Remember that the happiness of his humble home, remember that the sanctity of life in the hill villages of Afghanistan, among the winter snows, is as inviolable in the eye of Almighty God, as can be your own.
Read more at: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/w/williameg150999.html
The Wiki conveniently ignores this... it is a thoroughly jingoistic version of history. 
Another point that needs recalling is that Roberts was able to easily march to Kandahar in 1880 because he was doing so to withdraw and return to India. The Amir sent emissaries to the tribes urging them not to create any problems for his exit!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.17.232.183 (talk) 19:53, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gladstone condemned the invasion on moral grounds and reversed it after winning the 1880 election. 

message: Not an English victory by any means. The british just signed a treaty to stop Afghans from pestering them, that's a loss not a win. Akmal94 (talk) 16:49, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: While I would like to agree with you, the war is arguably a British victory/inconclusive, the British had met and ascertained some of their goals but were forced to Withdraw from Afghanistan and established a protected state, they used Afghanistan as a buffer. Noorullah21 (talk) 22:46, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  British victory 

message: Cureel has come forward and stated that Master's book does not mention the 2nd Anglo-Afghan War, that the alleged incidents were not about the 2nd Anglo-Afghan war. That does not look like vandalism, it looks like an informed position. Masters was writing some decades after his experience near, not in, Afghanistan and otherwise wrote popular fiction. Unless there is a positive discussion about the exact location and time that Masters is writing about and a defence of this author as a credible source, I wish to remove discussion of his comments from this entry. Brunswicknic (talk) 12:56, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Masters Book 

message: Multiple IP users that keeps making recent changes needs to discuss here - it is becoming an edit war. Eastfarthingan (talk) 15:33, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent changes 

message: protectorate or protected state?because wikipedia clearly differentiate between "protectorate" and "protected state". please change the war result imformation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.211.22.22 (talk) 21:07, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed to protectorate state, multiple sources coincide with it as well. Noorullah21 (talk) 22:47, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  protectorate or protected state? 

message: It should be "both sides claim victory" not "british victory" as both sides couldn't reach their objectives.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4643:C8EC:0:E08A:BD25:357C:3C8C (talk) 19:19, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Please state your sources. Eastfarthingan (talk) 19:41, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong information 

message: The source attached to the sentence of "british protectorate over afganistan" in the table doesnt even mention the word "protectorate" its obvious that afganistan is a protected state. 
Definition of protectorate:- British protectorates were protectorates under the jurisdiction of the British government. (Afganistan was not under jurisdication of Britian nor was it formally part of british empire)
Protected states:-the following states were never officially part of the British Empire and retained near-total control over internal affairs; however, the British controlled their foreign policy. Their status was rarely advertised while it was in effect, it becoming clear only after it was lifted. ( Since afganistan had full control over its internal administration and britian only covered its foreign policy afanistan is a protected state and not a protectoeate of British)
and all of these are mentioned in British protectorate wikipedia page.
:O really? From the second cited source: "In short, Afghanistan was virtually a British protectorate until 1919." Now whether that source is reliable or not is another story, but what you're claiming is certainly wrong. Again, we don't base articles of other articles. And might it be that it's different in other articles because you are changing it :P?  --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:26, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: AfghansPashtun  We can see there are deep feelings about this issue. Unfortunately, using wikipedia as a source for itself is not allowed. The sources that people are quoting to discuss the state of British control over Afghanistan at this time are using the word protectorate. Please, a reminder, words have more than one meaning (if they are not completely boring), and the word protectorate is not defined merely by a wikipedia article. A suggestion: there is a lot of energy going into changing one word, that should be spent finding reliable sources that discuss Afghanistan at the time and address the issue in the text, showing the nuances of British influence/control, &c. If one word keeps being changed without any reference backing this up, then other editors, in the good practice of requiring reliable sources, will revert the edit. Another suggestion: Google Scholar is one possible source of references, but please people need to look at the WP guidelines on editing and sources. I do thank you for your energy and enthusiasm to make WP a better thing. Brunswicknic (talk) 13:17, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

text: Multiple sources stick to the fact that it is a protected state, the ones that state protectorate seem to be confused with the two, and also in turn omit the result by saying effectivally and essentially, hence the case. Multiple sources including James onley's state that Afghanistan was a british protected state, while the sources provided by you are through interesting verifiability. Noorullah21 (talk) 22:49, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

text: Can you also revert the change back to British Protectorate in the infobox as that is what it originally was before the other editor changed it? I don't have access to change it. That will be helpful. Thank you. 199.82.243.85 (talk) 13:17, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Afganistan is a protected state of British and not a protectorate of British, there is difference between protectorate and protected state, The word protectorate is not appropriate as it refers to countries which were formally part of British empire, Afganistan was never formally part of British empire.

message: 182.185.114.99 (talk) 22:19, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 22:52, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 1 September 2021 

message: The war did not result in complete British victory as the Afghans had their Tactical Victory, after achieving the prevention of a British residence in Kabul and British military withdrawal. Although it is true there was British Strategic Victory, after achieving most desired goals (controlling Afghanistan’s foreign policy on the condition of subsidies paid to the Afghans, North-West Frontier province annexed to British India). The result of this war however should be the treaty, not a side being victorious. 168.4.124.75 (talk) 04:46, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Awhellnawr123214 (talk) 07:08, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 16 November 2023