Talk:Siege of Calcutta

This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

British Empire

	British Empire portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Empire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of British Empire 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.British EmpireWikipedia:WikiProject British EmpireTemplate:WikiProject British EmpireBritish Empire articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

India: History Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as High-importance).
	This article was last assessed in May 2012.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Military history: Asian / British / European / Indian / South Asia / Early Modern

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:
/
	Asian military history task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	Indian military history task force
	South Asian military history task force
	Early Modern warfare task force (c. 1500 – c. 1800)

Neutrality[edit]

I'm not sure who placed the neutrality template on this article but the second sentence which states "It began when British arrogance pushed the Nawabians (India) until the Nawabians attacked. " is a good example of what needs to be rewritten in this article. Is there a reference for such analysis? David D. (Talk) 23:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the tone that's the problem so much as... well, it originally stated that as a result of the siege, the East India Company was defeated and left the country, which is just incomprehensibly off the mark. I'm now leery of whether or not it needs to be rewritten from scratch.

"Nawabians" is marvellous - it's sort of like saying the "Kings" lost the English Civil War... I've had a hack at the most egregiously wrong parts, but the whole middle section will need to be redone. Shimgray | talk | 01:51, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has flat-out declared at the start of the article that "Modern Historians" believe the Black Hole never took place, with no references of any kind to support such a claim. In babu English, forsooth. Removing that. It will probably re-appear. Some consideration to protection for this article needs to be given.

French creating British-invasion-of-Bengal rumor: Unreferenced, so Removed[edit]

In the section "First Wars," the first sentence was originally a sentence fragment, whose parentheses included that the French created and spread this rumor. This claim was unreferenced and a bit wordy, so I removed it. If anybody finds a truthful reference, they can add this claim back with a reference. -BlueCaper (talk) 14:32, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Significant bias towards British POV[edit]

The article directly attributes fault to the Nawab of Bengal, characterizing him as rash/impetuous/scheming/unjust in his actions against a colonizing force, further framing the British as passive/reactors to aggression/victims. The article needs thorough decolonizing. 73.53.21.162 (talk) 14:42, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality[edit]

The explanatory paragraph is written with very poor grammar, does not provide an adequate explanation and doesn't really make sense.

The numbers in the info box are also wrong. 2A00:23C4:E220:3001:4D8B:FF6D:F65D:6633 (talk) 19:45, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]