Talk:Battle of Kohima

message: Note:  Project Banner with Nagaland workgroup parameters was added to this article talk page because the article falls under :Category:Nagaland or its subcategories. Should you feel this addition is inappropriate , please undo my changes and update/remove the relavent categories to the article --  Amartyabag  TALK2ME 10:33, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:INDIA]] Banner/Nagaland Addition 

message: I believe that the article Battle of the Tennis Court should be merged into this article. The Battle of the Tennis Court was only a part of the larger battle of Kohima, and not notable enough by itself to warrant a separate article. The current article on the Battle of the Tennis Court duplicates much of the information (and images) in this article, and contains some POV claims about it being the turning point of the entire Burma campaign. HLGallon (talk) 17:40, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with this. While the Battle of the Tennis Court was an important part of the Battle of Kohima (it has been a while since I read Slim's interesting description which, I notice, is not even referenced), it does not warrant an article of its own. --Regent's Park (Boating Lake) 18:22, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not so sure about the turning point issue though. The Battle of Kohima was a turning point in the war, perhaps the turning point, and the battle of the tennis court was the line in the sand, so to speak. I'll see if I can get hold of Slim and reread this chapter and see what he says. Nevertheless, I don't see the need for a separate article because it is not possible to isolate the BOTC from other action. --Regent's Park (Boating Lake) 18:28, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, the tennis court is important, and warrants a section in this article, but not an article of its own. IxK85 (talk) 09:45, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge suggestion

message: There is some confusion about the wording on the memorial. Specifically if it is "your" or "their". 
* 
*
The Worcestershire Regiment website includes a photograph that says "their". The burmastar.org.uk site states that it is "their" but in the replies to the blog includes a photograph of a memorial stone "David Lock for this photograph showing the wording of the Kohima Epitaph in the Kohima War Cemetery" but that is not from the original monument and it seems to be (mis)quoting the original in that it says
So it appears that there may be two versions of the Kohima epitaph. -- PBS (talk) 10:55, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I sought and obtained permission to publishes the above. If anyone wishes verify this email then please contact me. -- PBS (talk) 11:08, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Kohima Epitaph

message: They fought in this battle with Japanese against British, why they are not mention in belligerents order?Ovsek (talk) 05:56, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps because the battle was already decided before any INA troops reached the area? --Yaush (talk) 14:12, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

text: Let's please keep this civil. INA have been included as combatants on several occasions but subsequently removed, as their inclusion lacked any reliable source to support it. This still applies. To go further, even the sources cited in the article which include the most information from the Japanese perspective (Allen, Burma: the longest War and Keane, The Road of Bones) make no mention whatever of the INA in the Kohima fighting. To summarise therefore, find a reliable source if the INA are to be included. HLGallon (talk) 22:18, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: http://books.google.co.in/books?id=b9bQyfKq_EMC&pg=PA339&lpg=PA339&dq=Azad+Hind+Fauj+in+battle+of+Kohima&source=bl&ots=Oi0j09uhjv&sig=17crBy9xT4U5vNY_M4NC4yDc3_8&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tislU-XSG4jmrAeq54DYDA&ved=0CDoQ6AEwAzgK#v=onepage&q=Azad%20Hind%20Fauj%20in%20battle%20of%20Kohima&f=false well I found this, in April month section.Ovsek (talk) 04:46, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: "[April] 6 The Japanese Army along with the Azad Hind Fauj captured Kohima, according to a Japanese Radio announcement." Sorry, but a tengential report of the content of propaganda broadcast is not nearly good enough. The other two references to Kohima in the book (Netaji remembered) do not mention the INA in connection with the place. HLGallon (talk) 09:54, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

text: That extract refers to the INA moving up to the battle and crossing the Indo-Burma border, but not doing any fighting. --IxK85 (talk) 15:34, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The vast majority(!) of the INA had been captured by the Japanese early in the fighting and thus before the British and Indian armies had instigated proper jungle training. They are likely therefore to have been less than useful to the Japanese and possibly even a liability as they would have needed to have been fed from already limited Japanese supplies of food.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.173.56 (talk) 10:21, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indian National Army 

message: Currently the article states:
:"Jail Hill, together with Kuki Picquet, FSD and DIS, was finally captured by 33rd Indian Infantry Brigade on 11 May,"
Yet this sources "Chapter 3 The 1st Queen's In The Battles For Kohima" goes into considerable detail and contradicts Wikiepdia.
"11th May. GPT Ridge was first to be taken by another brigade, and then 1 Queen's was to capture Jail Hill at first light. The 1/1st punjabis were to capture 'Pimple' in the dark and dig in before it was light. The 4/15th punjabis, with a battalion of Royal Berkshires from the 2nd Division, were simultaneously to attack FSD and DIS."
"The Battalion moved out at 2200 hours on 10th May ... The forming up was complete at 0315 hours with two companies forward" -- which was 0315 on the 11th.
Here are some details of the following battle on the 11th from another source:
Company Sargent Major Buchanan of C Company, was just on my right, not a yard away, hugging the ground as we all were. I had seen a Jap aim his rifle and fire. Half a second later I fired and killed him with my rifle, which I preferred to carry rather than a Tommy gun; then I turned my head to the right and saw that the Sargent Major's head had rolled over. He had been shot through the head, as I saw the blood pouring out from his temple. What a chap he was, always full of good humour and fun, and I am sure he should not have been were he was, but as in B Company, C Company were using any ranks to make up the numbers.
After this there followed a sniping duel, and then things happened the like of which I have never seen before. It was the nearest approach to a snowball fight that could be imagined. The air became thick with grenades, both theirs and ours and we were all scurrying around trying to avoid them as they burst. This duel appeared to go on non-stop for an unreckonable time. We did a fair amount of damage to these little blighters. The Japanese up here seemed to be smaller than those in the Arkan. We saw two creep out of a bunker and make a run for it. The both had their head and arms in bandages. Pen Ingram misjudged a grenade and did not crawl away in time, with the result that he caught a number of pieces under the heart... he died about half an hour later. ... 
I put Private Easton in charge of those men in this area as this bunker was no longer causing us too much trouble. Easton had a Bren gun and remained in this position coming under mortar and light machine-gun sniping fire for the rest of the day, he himself continually sniping and harassing the enemy. By this section holding this ground it gave us depth. Private Easton was awarded an immediate Military Medal for his determined personal vigil, with complete disregard for his own safety which lasted for some six hours of daylight.
By late afternoon on 11th May the whole of the north west part of Jail Hill was in our hands. The troops had dug in as best they could, and were ordered to hold on at all costs, but casualties were mounting. The Battalion was reinforced by two companies of 4/1st Gurkha Rifles, but one company commander was killed almost immediately.
The next day, 12th May, some tanks got through to support the attackers. Some of the positions they pounded were only 15 yards in front of our forward troops, and they succeeded in destroying two bunkers. One large bunker was holding out very obstinately, and a company of Gurkhas put in a brilliant attack and managed. to surround it. Fighting continued all day, and Major M L Mansel, A Company Commander, was mortally wounded. Towards evening things became a little easier.
"At dawn on 13th May, patrols found the enemy had gone. Twenty bunkers, all recently occupied, were found on the hill."
So it seems that Jail hill was not captured until the 13th. -- PBS (talk) 12:27, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capture of Jail Hill 

message: In the section Japanese retreat is the sentence: Once these supplies were exhausted, they had had to make do with meagre captured stocks and what they could forage in increasingly hostile local villages.
Is the had had correct?
Yours --Baumfreund-FFM (talk) 19:14, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Please feel free to correct grammatical errors.  Hamish59 (talk) 20:50, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm no native speaker and I'm not sure if this is incorrect. --Baumfreund-FFM (talk) 06:10, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Even native English speakers get confused sometimes! Thanks for asking! Yes, it was incorrect. Here. Not everywhere, unfortunately!  :)Student7 (talk) 19:21, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Battle of Kohima. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090806001743/http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/4C2B25FC-2E6C-45F9-B785-8A75139E9A0A/0/ww2_kohima.pdf to http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/4C2B25FC-2E6C-45F9-B785-8A75139E9A0A/0/ww2_kohima.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090806001743/http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/4C2B25FC-2E6C-45F9-B785-8A75139E9A0A/0/ww2_kohima.pdf to http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/4C2B25FC-2E6C-45F9-B785-8A75139E9A0A/0/ww2_kohima.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090806001743/http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/4C2B25FC-2E6C-45F9-B785-8A75139E9A0A/0/ww2_kohima.pdf to http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/4C2B25FC-2E6C-45F9-B785-8A75139E9A0A/0/ww2_kohima.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150510152752/http://www.burmastar.org.uk/epitaph.htm to http://www.burmastar.org.uk/epitaph.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090806001743/http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/4C2B25FC-2E6C-45F9-B785-8A75139E9A0A/0/ww2_kohima.pdf to http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/4C2B25FC-2E6C-45F9-B785-8A75139E9A0A/0/ww2_kohima.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:04, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Once again, the INA and one of its commanders ([Shah Nahwaz Khan]) have been reintroduced as combatants and commanders, this time with what purports to be reliable sources. (Peter W. Fay, The Forgotten Army: India's Armed Struggle for Independence, 1942–1945, pp. pp. 283–292, and Hugh Toye, The Springing Tiger: A Study of the Indian National Army and of Netaji , pp. 138, 162, 189–191, 203, 210). Unfortunately, these sources do not support the assertion. The Fay work, which I have read carefully, discusses only the Japanese in combat at Kohima. It discusses the INA contribution in the Arakan, and at Palel, indeed everywhere during the Battle of Imphal except at Kohima. Other sources are specific; no INA units got closer to Kohima than Ukhrul, over 20 miles away, and then only after the Japanese had begun to retreat. The references in the Toye work suggest that the Google books preview is not the same edition as that quoted. I have enquired at the local library for it and will read it carefully, but I doubt whether any assertion it makes will challenge the concensus of other historical works. HLGallon (talk) 20:41, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  INA again 

message: Is there any reason this article has never gone to GAN? On a skim it doesn't seem that far off FAC. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:25, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  GAN