Jump to content

Talk:Henry Havelock

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No controversy/criticism section?

[edit]

Surely there should be one here, esp. regarding his action during the Indian revolt. Children of the dragon (talk) 04:29, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

poorly sourced article with British nationalist WP:POV, its just someone's flashy opinion of him.Being.human (talk)

Date of death

[edit]

The article states that he died on 29 November 1857. What is the source for this? The article on the Siege of Lucknow says that he "died (of a sudden attack of dysentery) on 23 November", without citing a specific source. The biography of Havelock [1] (p. 269) says "On 24th, his end was obviously near at hand. . . And Havelock died". The Diary of Julia Inglis, says on 24 November "Just as we were leaving Dil Khoosha Park this morning, the news was brought us that General Havelock was dead; he had been sinking from the time he entered the Residency." [2]. Likewise, the statue in Sunderland [3] gives the date of death as 24 November 1857.

I have amended the article accordingly. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 06:38, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Henry Havelock. 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:20, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Poorly sourced article with heavy "British Colonial nationalist" WP:POV, also needs a separate section on rape plunder and massacre around Cawnpur by Havlock's forces to avenge Bibipur

[edit]

Whle article is screaming to be reverted, huge chunks of unsourced material and all with flowery praise, "won all battles despite being grossly outnumbered:" (well he had well trained and well equipped soldiers with guns against starved rag-tag untrained crowd against him), again all with no critical analysis, neatly excluded are his his defeat in the hand of Nana Sahib (see source and tatyta tope see this, he was the "eventual" winner of the "finals", not winner of almost all battles, do not just copy paste or insert rephrased propaganda from the British colonialist reports. There is a need for the separate section on rape plunder and massacre by Havlock's forces to avenge Bibipur Whoever created it,please clean it up fast or else Im going to revert all unsourced and all flowery stuff, I will check back after a week, if fluff is still there, it gets chopped off. Here is the opportunity for the collaborative ENHANCEMENTS in the mean time. I have given specific actionable tips (remove flowery language, source everything or else remove it, include criticism and counter criticism, provide due weightage to all aspects without giving undue weightge or length to one particular nationalist (Indian or British) view, make it FAIR and BALANCED. WINNERS CAN NO LONGER COOK UP AND REWRITE THE HISTORY. Not on wikipedia. Thanks. Being.human (talk)

Hi - The article was originally created by User:Morwen in December 2003 as a stub and it has since been expanded by many other editors. There is no onus on the original creator to "clean it up fast" but if you want to improve the article by removing the unsourced and flowery stuff and by adding new, properly sourced material, then you are welcome to do that. Best wishes, Dormskirk (talk) 10:05, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Henry Havelock. 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:41, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Henry_Havelock&oldid=1207590154"