Talk:3rd Bombay European Regiment

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 3rd Bombay European Regiment article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 8, 2010	WikiProject peer review	Reviewed

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

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 met Coverage and accuracy: criterion 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

Review[edit]

Inviting extensive review and additional info from other sources and SOME IMAGES if possible......--MT (talk) 17:28, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

London Gazette[edit]

Rose's despatches and so on were originally published in the London Gazette and these are available online. Since it appears that these despatches are already being used as references, it might make sense to use the gazette version, as this will be more readily accessible to other editors than the sources currently cited. See for example:

"No. 22129". The London Gazette. 20 April 1858. (Rahatgarh)
"No. 22138". The London Gazette. 11 May 1858. (Barodia)

David Underdown (talk) 10:57, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An excellent idea.....it's more accessible....getting to it right away...thanks for bringing it to my notice! --MT (talk) 05:47, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reads fine - input per request.[edit]

The article reads quite well and in fact I was able to glean a few factoids from it that I was previously unaware of. Job well done so far. Keep up the research and add what you can when you find it.BGinOC (talk) 02:04, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]