Talk:Battle of the Iron Bridge

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Greece Low‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece 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.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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.

Military history: Middle East / Roman & Byzantine / Early Muslim

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
	Roman and Byzantine military history task force
	Early Muslim military history task force (c. 600 – c. 1600)

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Chamal_N, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 22 November 2008.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Untitled[edit]

This article is simply pro-Islam propaganda written by an amateur and not useful for Wikipedia.Wiki1609 20:55, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would really like to know how this is pro islamic propaganda, i'm not the author, but to me it doesnt promote islam in any way, I'd like to see your reasoning behind that statement, all i can see is the description of a battle, that oxidentalists or orientalists, muslims and non-muslims alike might like to research, and as far as I can see this is a new topic so how do you know if its useful to wikipedia or not?

isnt everyone who writes on wikipedia an amatuer, no-one get paid to write on here.....

Describing the Byzantine forces as the "enemy" gives the article a strong point of view.

heres how its pro islamic[edit]

"byzantines was Thrashed". 50,000 men? Followed by 70,000 more men? The casualties are inflated

"Muslims troops"..."Muslim columns" "The enemy". Blood hell, there were thousands of christian rebels on the side of the arabs.

Its glorifying the conquest "the greatest city in Syria, blah blah" Tourskin 04:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The new article[edit]

The quality of this article that i wrote last year is not of a type that an encyclopedis article must have, realizing this i am gonna replace it with the new article, hopefully it will be comprehensive and of comparatively good qualityMohammad Adil 21:53, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was true[edit]

At that time, islam was the most powerful empire. They have many great, strong soldier. A large group of trained infantry and experienced cavalry. Elite warriors with high level of strength. They have good strategist and a brave leader too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.186.116.2 (talk) 16:37, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Muslim sources[edit]

How come only Muslim sources are used. Their POV is likely not to be neutral(maybe propaganda giving courage to modern day Muslim martyrs). Isidoros47 (talk) 17:47, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008[edit]

Ensured that the article is: within project scope, tagged for task forces, and assessed for class.

This article would benefit from: NPOV expansion and additional in-text citations. --Rosiestep (talk) 22:56, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV dispute[edit]

I believe the NPOV concerns have been addressed now. The article looks all right to me. It'd be OK to remove the POV tag I think, but I'll leave that to you guys. Cheers. Chamal ^talk 10:22, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

where is the iron bridge?[edit]

where is the iron bridge?

where is the iron bridge?[edit]

where is the iron bridge?--82.81.98.19 (talk) 14:10, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Where do the troop numbers in The Sword of Allah: Khalid bin al-Waleed come from?[edit]

I just checked after the last edit the links that are given in regards to the size of the Byzantine army. The first issue is that the last editor apparently misread the numbers in the link provided here https://byzantium.gr/battle.php?byzbat=b7_18 and changed the number instead of the mentioned 15 to 30k.

The second issue is that the book The Sword of Allah: Khalid bin al-Waleed is given as reference for the maximum number of troops and when I check these two versions available on archive, I am not able to find any numbers. The reference says chapter 36, but in the section on the battle or in the preceding and following paragraphs they are not mentioned either: https://archive.org/details/khalid_202310/page/296/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/KhalidBinAl-waleedSwordOfAllah.pdf/page/n291/mode/2up

I will for now revert the change to correct the number stated in the first source for the minimum number and try to find another reliable source for the second, but in case this is futile I suggest to just take the numbers from the first source (i.e. army size of the Byzantine army: 15-20k).

A third problem is that The Sword of Allah is also given as references to the casualties of the Byzantines, ut again, nothing is to be found.PontiffSulivahn (talk) 19:20, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I have not encountered any information about the troop size outside of this website: https://byzantium.gr/battle.php?byzbat=b7_18

I have thus removed the 30k which was not in the book "The Sword of Allah". I also have my doubts on the claim that the Byzantines suffered their third heaviest losses. I tried to find the following source which is given as a reference: al-Tabari, Muhammad Ibn Jarir. History of the Prophets and Kings, Vol. 3, pp. 99–100. and found this in the archive:https://archive.org/details/history-of-al-tabarri Volume 3 of this version does not deal with the conquest of Syria by the Arabs and I have also not found the information in the other volumes. Maybe I have the wrong version?PontiffSulivahn (talk) 23:16, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]