Talk:Eight-Nation Alliance/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Eight-Nation Alliance. 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/20081202040957/http://www.hkptu.org/society/pubin/fish/3287eng.htm to http://www.hkptu.org/society/pubin/fish/3287eng.htm

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 21:36, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Unclear, awkward wording in "Role" section of infobox. Source?

The wording in the "Role" section of the infobox (specifically the italicized part) is quite awkward/unclear and sounds as though it was written by a non-native English speaker (or otherwise awkwardly translated from a non-English source). Unless there is a source attesting to this particular wording (in which case, that source should certainly be cited), perhaps it can be rewritten to be more clear and succinct.

Current wording:

"Role: To safeguard the privileges of foreign nationals and Chinese Christians, the Qing government is required to punish the boxing people and the Qing government officials who support and use the boxing people to consolidate and seize the extended lease area."

Perhaps we could change it to something like:

"Role: To relieve the Siege of the International Legations, suppress the Boxer Rebellion, and safeguard the privileges of foreign nationals and Chinese Christians." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Analytical Difference Engine (talk • contribs) 23:39, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Eight Nation Alliance

Why is there so little about this part of China's history? There were eight countries that invaded and subjected Chinese to unfair treaty rules and force the Chinese to live like second class-citizens in their own country. Why is there so little written about it? We speak of thr indigenous communities being subjected to unjust treatment, China is one of the few countries that have been torn by war and pillaged yet no one gives cares to spoke of the horror treatment they have endured. 2607:9880:2550:21:39C4:4E31:22EB:63D (talk) 22:51, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Forces of the Eight-Nation Alliance Photo

According to what reliable source is the "Australian" in the forces photo identifiable as such? (I mean other than google) It likely pre-dates Federation in Australia, and shows no colonial uniform recognisable to me - nor would it make sense for a British Colonial to be included! But a Russian Marine seems more likely. Nickm57 (talk) 00:43, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

So it seems the "Australian" has been identified as such, more or less for the following reasons. Most commentators on this photo suggest the uniform resembles that of a Royal Navy bluejacket, and therefore he could also be a rating from the colonial navies of New South Wales or Victoria, who were also in China in late 1900. But there is still also some resemblance to the attire of a Russian marine to be noted. However, I get that this "looks like" discussion could go on forever. If he really was from one of the "Australian" colonial navies he was actually posed here as another member of the British Empire, like the Indian soldier. Like India, Australia did not exist at the time and could not be a member of the Eight-Nation alliance. A technical point I know but important for passing casual readers to realise.Nickm57 (talk) 21:51, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

So perhaps the title could be corrected to read "Troops of some of the Eight-Nation Alliance in 1900 (Russia excepted).Left to right: Britain, United States, Royal or Australian colonial Navy, British Indian Army, Germany, France, Austria-Hungary, Italy, Japan." Nickm57 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2022 (UTC)