Talk:Mahdist War

Australia: Military history Low‑importance

	Australia portal Mahdist War is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Military history: African / British / European / Middle East

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 articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	African military history task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	Middle Eastern military history task force

Africa: Sudan Top‑importance

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Sudan (assessed as Top-importance).

Egypt Low‑importance

	Egypt portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Egypt on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject EgyptTemplate:WikiProject EgyptEgypt articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

There's a hole in the article

I'm not competent but I find it strange that this article mentions neither the Beja nor the Fuzzy Wuzzies. Maikel 12:05, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The reasons of the revolt

The article used to say that one of the reasons for the start of the revolt were the egyptian attempts to abolish slave trade. It truth is quite the opposite, as one of the main reasons for invading Sudan in the first place was to obtain slaves for service in the Egyptian army.

Can Advisers Consent?

"The British advisers to the Egyptian government gave tacit consent for another expedition." I find this sentence a bit strange -- if they were only advisers how can they consent? Flaviusvulso (talk) 05:26, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mahdist War. 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) 01:07, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Australia?

How can Australia have been a belligerent? The war was in the 19th century, and Australia did not exist until the 20th century. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.90.242.158 (talk) 15:50, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mahdi was well armed

The idea that the Mahdist forces at Omdurman were poorly armed is an oft-repeated myth to explain their catastrophic defeat. They certainly had 30,000 modern rifles, and reportedly also some machine guns and artillery. They simply didn't use them well. Cassandra

Sentence fragment removed

The following sentence fragment was near the end of the lead:

Expanding the scale of the conflict to include not only Britain and Egypt but the Italian Empire, the Belgian Congo and the Ethiopian Empire.

If someone can complete the thought, or turn it into a sentence, it can be put back in. MayerG (talk) 03:16, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New South Wales, not Australia...

Can somebody correct the inclusion of Australia - prior to its federated existence - as being involved in this British Empire Imperialist war, as it was solely a New South Wales contingent that fought and as a colonial expeditionary force, thus the flag will also need to be corrected. Furthermore, can someone actually illustrate the activities of the New South Wales and Canadian colonial expeditionary forces, as I see nothing speaking to their involvement in this war as members of the Empire in any regards. Both colonies had achieved Responsible Government during the mid 1800s, so they are NOT "British" and are not to be lumped in with such a term - anywhere in Wikipedia - from that period onwards, within any conflicts the British Empire engaged in historically. Nürö ^{G'DÄŸ MÄTË} 10:33, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]