Talk:Siege of Kut

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on April 29, 2006, April 29, 2008, April 29, 2009, and April 29, 2010.

Military history: British / European / Ottoman / World War I C‑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 articles

C

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

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

Associated task forces:
/
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	Ottoman military history task force
	World War I task force

Turkey Low‑importance

	Turkey portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics 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.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Kut-al-Amara or just Kut?[edit]

How should it go in the top of the battle box? Tiquicia 01:02, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just Kut, To the extent the battle is remembered, "Siege of Kut" is the best known name. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nunquam Dormio (talk • contribs) 10:48, 16 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Aftermath, last sentence.[edit]

"In a few short months, the city of Kut was reborn with a growing population of two hundred [3]."

1. I think "In a few short months" is not encyclopedialike and ugly, maybe that's just me but it's certainly not very precise. 2. According to the article the pre-siege population was around 6500. If it was reborn in 1917 with a population of 200 something big should have happened to the population, this is however not mentioned. 3. The previous sentence says 'slowly rebuild' and receiving funds for reconstructing. While this doesn't flatly contradict the last sentence it is at odds with it.

Come to think of it, last-but-one-sentence "..while those citizens who had lost family in the siege received funds for the reconstruction of their homes". Does it mean all citizens that met this criteria? Wat if a citizen lost family but their homes were intact?, wat if someone's house was destroyed but had no family? I think the sentence is vague and probably not true.

If these sentences are very well sourced they should be reworded, if not & in the meantime I think the end should be replaced by "..war torn country and Kut was slowly rebuild." Not much I admit but also not dubious.

Pukkie (talk) 05:35, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aftermath[edit]

"Some of the Indian prisoners of war from Kut later came to join the Turkish Indian Volunteer Corps under the influence of Deobandis of Tehrek e Reshmi Rumal and the abject support of the German High Command." I really can't see why this should be described as "abject". I have changed "abject support" to "encouragement". Maproom (talk) 14:05, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Halil Pasa[edit]

In the whole article there is almost no mention of Halil Pasa and other Turkish commanders who defeated a superior force. It is as if British fought the Martians. There is not a single Turkish reference!--Murat (talk) 01:01, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Battle Map[edit]

its in a bad place and so will move to the right so it does not overlap the text.--XChile (talk) 21:44, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is also for the wrong battle - the map is from 1st Battle of Kut in September 1915, whereas the Siege didn't start until December 1915DavisGL (talk) 14:59, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question :[edit]

Its says here :

(copy paste) Strength of allied troops : 31,000

Casualties and losses 30,000 dead or wounded 13,000 captured

How Allies can have 31 000 men involved in fightings and 30 000 + 13 000 casualties? 89.172.66.174 (talk) 08:54, 29 April 2010 (UTC)soundwave[reply]

The answer is simple; Some of the captured men were likely also wounded, hence falling into both categories. 96.61.59.200 (talk) 07:34, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect link[edit]

The relief attempt of general Gorringe is called 'the first battle of Kut' and this battle is then linked to. But as the page 'first battle of Kut' redirects to the 'siege of Kut' page, when you follow the link you just end up on top of this same page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.91.175.222 (talk) 09:40, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 18 May 2021[edit]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Von Der Goltz was not a part of the war. He came when Kut was almost conquered by Colonel Halil. In the last days he(Goltz) was suffering from typhus and he came to Kut just so his name could be rembered as a conqueror of Kut, which he really wasn't. He didn't deserve it. 182.185.11.73 (talk) 14:14, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:36, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Nakhchivan[edit]

Porno 95.153.161.130 (talk) 18:01, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Aghdam[edit]

Porno 95.153.161.130 (talk) 18:04, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Fizuli[edit]

Porno 95.153.161.130 (talk) 18:04, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Occupation of Jalalabat[edit]

porno 95.153.170.28 (talk) 13:13, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Yangikent (1921)[edit]

Porno 95.153.170.28 (talk) 13:14, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Shahrisabs (1921)[edit]

PORNO 95.153.170.28 (talk) 13:15, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Karshi (1921)[edit]

porno 95.153.170.28 (talk) 13:16, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Khiva (1918)[edit]

porno 95.153.170.28 (talk) 13:17, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Garm (1921)[edit]

Porno 95.153.170.28 (talk) 13:18, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Djizak (1921)[edit]

Porno 95.153.170.28 (talk) 13:19, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Kitab (1922)[edit]

Porno 95.153.170.28 (talk) 13:19, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Koylybai-Bolat[edit]

porno 195.19.122.8 (talk) 11:27, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of the Olkeyek River[edit]

porno 195.19.122.8 (talk) 11:31, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

mustaf(1844)[edit]

porno 195.19.122.8 (talk) 11:34, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abdulhamid had Mustafa Kemal imprisoned! 46.16.228.144 (talk) 18:18, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mustafa kemal pasha

46.16.228.144 (talk) 18:19, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Italic 46.16.228.144 (talk) 18:45, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

everything the talked about to Abdulhamid on daily basis! With this raid, all members of the "secret organization", including Mustafa Kemal, Ali Fuat and Fethi Okyar, were caught by the 46.16.228.144 (talk) 18:50, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]