Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a22d9d964c0ddafe

Jump to content

Talk:Battle of Chakirmaut

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 7 months ago by J390 in topic The coalition's size

Category - Battles involving the Mongol Empire

[edit]

This battle was fought in 1204. Mongol empire was founded in 1206. whether this battle's inclusion in the "category - Battles involving the Mongol Empire" is correct? சுப. இராஜசேகர் (talk) 15:24, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

To become an empire they had to conquer and unite the other Mongols, so you're right they weren't an empire yet. But there's no category for the predecessor confederation. This battle directly led to their empire at any rate. J390 (talk) 22:28, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

The coalition's size

[edit]

What source says that there were 78,000 warriors in the coalition against Temujin? I failed to find any source that claims to know the approximate army size of the tribes that fought Temjin, and found only 2 sources that knew the size of Temujin's forces (66,000). From what I understood, the size difference was much bigger than 66/78 (in favor of the coalition, though they were crushed by Genghis). אוהד בר-און (talk) 14:38, 11 December 2025 (UTC)Reply

I did some digging into what source as the creator of this article presumably I used for that number and found it was originally just stated "more than Temujin" and the number was not added until an edit by a banned IP number on August 8, 2024. It sounds like the verifiability is questionable and should be changed. Us admins should've caught that sooner. I'll revert it. J390 (talk) 02:40, 12 December 2025 (UTC)Reply