This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

India This redirect 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 Military history: Medieval This redirect 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 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: /  Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500) South Asia This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject South Asia, which aims to improve the quality and status of all South Asia-related articles. For more information, please visit the Project page.South AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject South AsiaTemplate:WikiProject South AsiaSouth Asia Asia This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Asia 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.AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject AsiaTemplate:WikiProject AsiaAsia History This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory

@DeepstoneV, is there any source that explicitly state this as "Battle of Pangal"? If no, we are not keeping the article Imperial^[AFCND] 09:13, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are sources that states "Battle of Pangal" or "Battle of Pangul" DeepstoneV (talk) 10:22, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. Imperial^[AFCND] 10:28, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DeepstoneV Can u cite me a source which says Krishnadevaraya was present at the siege or in Garrison? Sudsahab (talk) 05:30, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Battle of the Krishna^^: 1520 A.D,

Meanwhile, as soon as his arrangements were ready, the Adil Shah moved with a force of 120,000 foot, 18,000 horses*® and 150^ elephants to the relief of Raichoor, But though fewer in numbers, its effectiveness was more than counter balanced by the very strong artillery he had brought with him. On reaching the Krishna, as he found all the fords held by the troops of Vijayanagar, he encamped on its northern bank choosing his position welL Giving orders to his engineers to build the necessary number of rafts, he waited quietly for some days expecting the Vijayanagar army to cross the river and engage him where he was. 0 ut finding the Hindus unwilling to be drawn into the snare which he had spread for them, he at last settled to take the initiative himself. So, one day in a moment of intoxication he crossed the river with 250 elephants*’ and a part of his army not more than 2,000 men**. With these he marched to within three leagues of Krishijia’s camp And the source-The History Of The Vijayanagar Empire

by

Sharma, M. H. Rama

u cited no where mention about the battle of pangal(i am talking about only this source).Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

Best regards,@Sudsahab Sudsahab (talk) 05:35, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Krishnadevaraya opted to march against the Qutb Shah leader. He came with 30,000 horses and 3,000 foot soldiers. Quli Qutb responded, and the two armies met at Pangal where the Vijayanagar army had encamped. In battle, the Golconda forces were successful, forcing the retreat of Krishnadevaraya who left behind a small force to defend the fort.. This is from page number 47, Kingship and Colonialism in India’s Deccan 1850–1948 written by Benjamin B Cohen. Best DeepstoneV (talk) 11:47, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

can u please send me the link Sudsahab (talk) 12:46, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A page whose language is an AI-generated version with the information being of different of variety of the same event and doesn't confirm the count of the army of both the sides and the results as well, most of the information about this battle is hidden and only a half-baked history being shared

Most of the sources given here themselves do not support the statement of Krishnaraya being present in the battle rather than only of his forces and an officer to defend the fort of Pangal, also there are reasons for the same thing given in the same book by Sharma which was also not included here Sathyashraya (talk) 09:10, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quoting from B Cohen Across the river, angered, the great Vijayanagar king Krishnadevaraya opted to march against the Qutb Shah leader. He came with 30,000 horses and 3,000 foot soldiers. Quli Qutb responded, and the two armies met at Pangal where the Vijayanagar army had encamped. In battle, the Golconda forces were successful, forcing the retreat of Krishnadevaraya who left behind a small force to defend the fort. Imperial^[AFCND] 09:21, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Only from B Cohen's statement, others don't support (both primary and secondary) Sathyashraya (talk) 09:31, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. You cannot remove a cited information, whether there is one or more. Pinging author @DeepstoneV. Imperial^[AFCND] 09:50, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How can it be a reason? and I didn't remove any cited information, infact my information itslef was removed leading it to Wikipedia:Disruptive editing Sathyashraya (talk) 09:56, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As explained earlier, In action to B. Cohen's source there should be 2 or more sources for WP:AGEMATTERS which supports the statement, and the author might also mistook the event from reading from his POV, while the older one gives support to be against the Cohen's one

The edits can't lead it to further Wikipedia:Disruptive editing and should be discussed in the Talkpage Sathyashraya (talk) 09:54, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Take the Source for Raya Presence

^[1] DeepstoneV (talk) 11:43, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is same as the previous accounts, which I already said that Raya wasn't present but his force was and this statement by "History of Deccan" says "After a great battle near Pangal, in which the Hindoos (Vijayanagar forces or vassals) were worsted, "the Sultan succeeded in capturing the two forts of Kovilconda and Ganpoora, and then returned with a considerable amount of plunder" and the statement "against Krishna Deva Raya" shows againts the forces of Raya than Raya himself

These words sound not more than Primary source by a Qutb historian or Firishta and the scences from Kovilconda and Ganpoora by Qutbs were againts the Nayak kingdoms Sathyashraya (talk) 11:53, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DeepstoneV has a past of putting Non RS and RAJ sources in many articles (which was later removed by me), I'm quite familiar with their recent conducts and this time they are doing WP:SYNTH as other sources don't say that Krishnadevray was present in this battle. The source History of the Deccan. provided by Deepstone nowhere said that Krishnadevray was present in-person in this battle rather it says The first campaign of the new Sultan was an unprovoked one, against Krishna Deva Raya, of Vijayanagar. And from this particular quotation deepstone concluded that Krishnadevray participated in the battle. Sudsahab (talk) 20:38, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

vijaynagar victory 2409:4081:D1F:A60D:0:0:9708:D707 (talk) 02:38, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]