Talk:Battle of Mecca (1916)

Saudi Arabia Mid‑importance

	Saudi Arabia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Saudi Arabia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Saudi Arabia 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.Saudi ArabiaWikipedia:WikiProject Saudi ArabiaTemplate:WikiProject Saudi ArabiaSaudi Arabia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Middle East / Ottoman / World War I

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:
/
	Middle Eastern military history task force
	Ottoman military history task force
	World War I task force

Arab world Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arab world, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Arab world 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.Arab worldWikipedia:WikiProject Arab worldTemplate:WikiProject Arab worldArab world articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Needs casualty counts. LauraIngallsEvenWilder (talk) 20:57, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 2023

Hello @M.Bitton, now that we resolved the issue on the Kaaba page, we can probably add the text back here without the problematic sentence. However, maybe we can also include the JSTOR source in that text, that speaks about 9 casualties among the Meccans. AgisdeSparte (talk) 10:32, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We also need to see if we include it in the introduction. It seems to me that this is an essential element of the battle, which is actually a very swift battle but with significant propaganda implications, as the source we have already discussed in the article on the Kaaba states: In the meantime, Ottoman blunders served Sharif Hussein and provided religious arguments for his rebellion. The soldiers of the Mecca Citadel, in fact, did nothing better than to cannon-fire at the Grand Mosque. The bombardment impacts reached the ground less than two meters from the Kaaba, and the sacred carpet covering it partially caught fire. A splendid opportunity for the Sharif to denounce the impiety of the Young Turks and their 'hatred of Islam.' According to him, in his proclamation of June 27, 1916, the Ottoman government had destroyed the powers of the Sultan, violated the rights of the Caliphate, led the country into war, trampled on the pillar of Ramadan by ordering its troops to break the fast... The bombing of the Holy Places was thus only the logical culmination of a sacrilegious policy, and Hussein could drape himself in the dignity of the green flag, casting the stain of betrayal – religious betrayal – on the Young Turks, whom he stabs in the back. AgisdeSparte (talk) 10:39, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No issue with including the casualties in the article's body. The text that you quoted is about propaganda, so it stands to reason for it to highlight the part that it's interested in, but that doesn't make it the most important part of the battle. M.Bitton (talk) 15:12, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]