Jump to content

Talk:Kingdom of Nepal

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Meaning of names

[edit]

A lot of the names seem to have repeating formulaic elements (Bir Bikram Shah Dev) which appear to multiply the further we move through the history of the dynasty. Presumably Shah is the same title we know from the Persian monarchy. What do the other bits mean? This would deserve an explanation. --Doric Loon (talk) 11:52, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

End of Monarchy

[edit]

How are we going to treat this issue? The monarchy isn't officially abolished until April and yet the site is using the date of the recent vote in parliament. A very relevant factor here is that the current Nepali parliament isn't an elected one and the whole idea of the delay (until April) is to give the public some say on the issue in elections scheduled for April. I don't think it is appropriate to date the end of the monarchy to December as it has not been implemented as yet and the situation is still in flux. Given the unstable situation we may yet see any number of events between now and April including possible abdications (meaning at least one more king), delays in the election (it has already been delayed twice), etc. A past precedent is the end of the Italian monarchy when the king wasn't deposed until after an election was held on the question. It is not dated at the point where the legislative branch decided to hold an election on the issue. The French Revolution artice on Louis XVI goes the opposite direction and dates the end of his reign to his deposition in October 1792 rather than to his execution in January 1793. Of course, there the intent of the legislative branch was much clearer that the king was immediately dethroned than it is in the current instance. It appears, especially in light of the part of the Parliament's stipulation that it can remove the king by a 2/3 vote prior to the election if he interferes with it, that Nepal has not yet abolished its Monarchy. It has only announced an intent to do so if the newly elected body concurs in April. --68.42.120.249 (talk) 20:22, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree people are being to premature the monarchy doesn’t end until after the elections in April 2008 or as you say with 2/3 vote parliament to remove him immediately if he interferes. I think it’s fine to note that the monarchy is set to be abolished but saying that it’s set in stone that the monarchy will end in 2008 we simply cannot say for certain and as you rightly point out there are a number of events that could place between now and April. I personally think his reign should be listed as (2001-present) as this is factually correct and after the elections if parliament then declares a republic fine, then we can say the monarchy ends in April 2008 but lets wait for it to actually happen. - dwc lr (talk) 16:06, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, the monarchy hasn't been abolished yet. Things can change within four months, until then let's be patient. GoodDay (talk) 20:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kingdom of Nepal.png Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Kingdom of Nepal.png, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 08:06, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong redirected

[edit]

Shah Dynasty is the dynasty of Shah king of Nepal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.244.201.35 (talk) 09:55, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nepal was ruled by Shah kings when Nepal was called as Kingdom of Nepal. So, it seems correct. ASCII-002 I NotifyOnline 10:21, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Kingdom of Nepal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:13, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling edits

[edit]

Edited spelling in multiple sentences AleksandarTomic22 (talk) 01:05, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure those were spelling mistakes? There are different national varieties of English used on Wikipedia which might spell things slightly differently from the one you're most accustomed to using and the style used in each article is determined through consensus and things such as MOS:TIES. There's a hidden note at the very top of the article which says "This article is in Commonwealth English", so the changes you made do not seem to have been needed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:43, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kingdom of Nepal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:29, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kingdom of Nepal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:30, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:07, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:10, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:08, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unbalanced information and potential vandalism as well as bad grammar.

[edit]

The paragraph about the Nepalese Royal Massacre appears to have been edited to reflect a extremely unbalanced view, which is full of bad grammar like the &. However there have been quite a few edits since, so has this been judged to be ok?

What is this article?

[edit]

Looks to me like just a WP:CFORK of Nepal. Why do we need it? It was not a different country, only a period of Nepalese history, that's best covered in Nepal, History of Nepal and related sub-articles. I think we should just redirect this to Nepal. Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:33, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging Curious km (talk · contribs) to the discussion. I agreed that this do not need to be on a standalone article, as it is looks like a WP:CFORK of Nepal. SunDawntalk 10:56, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Usedtobecool (talk · contribs) and SunDawn (talk · contribs), See Kingdom of Sikkim, Kirat Kingdom, Republic of Afghanistan, Emirate of Afghanistan, Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, Kingdom of Afghanistan, Gorkha Kingdom, Raj Darbhanga and many such still exist which don't represent not a different country. See these:-
  • List of Jain empires and dynasties
  • List of Iranian dynasties and countries
  • List of Rajput dynasties and states
  • List of Hindu empires and dynasties
Aren't they WP:CFORK of other country or place? Kingdom of Nepal clearly mentions everything in past tense is the last Hindu kingdom of world, not very old incident so it has very high importance in history and study! The Kingdom of Nepal (Nepali: नेपाल अधिराज्य), also known as the Kingdom of Gorkha or Gorkha Empire (Nepali: गोरखा अधिराज्य) or Asal Hindusthan (Real Land of Hindus),[note 1] was a Hindu kingdom on the Indian subcontinent, formed in 1768, by the unification of Nepal. Can you deny this opinion? They are part of history and I don't feel any Wikipedia policy obstructs study of past. These are important article of history. What do you say here? Stop freeing you are superior to a Create discussion at wiki project Nepal and wiki project Hinduism first than redirecting and deleting.Curious km (talk) 11:16, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sikkim was an actual country that ceased to exist as an actual country when it became a state of India. Kingdom of Nepal and Federal democratic republic of Nepal are both the same country; same name (Nepal), same flag, same territory. It just got rid of the monarchy and changed its long name. The article is a WP:CFORK of Nepal. If it is to exist as a standalone article, what should the WP:SCOPE of this article be? And is that better here than at Nepal#History, History of Nepal, Premodern history of Nepal, Modern history of Nepal, Shah dynasty, etc.? Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:55, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What about Republic of Afghanistan, Emirate of Afghanistan, Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, Kingdom of Afghanistan? More can be seen at Template:Former Monarchies.Please stop making non-scense talk! Leave this page as it is or make Afd at related wiki projects. Nepal existed as Kingdom of Nepal before 2008 and that's it! This article is notable to be kept on Wikipedia. Get ready for consensus if you still disagree. I challange keep will win to redirect.Curious km (talk) 15:10, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SunDawn, I guess that's that. Do you know if WP:MERGE would be more appropriate than AFD? I find AFD gets broader participation, at least in this topic area. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:27, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
After a more careful reading, I think merging this to various Nepal-related articles will not work. While some contents can be merged, the era of Kingdom of Nepal is quite distinct in the history of Nepal, thus simply redirecting it to Nepal may not be good way. I think while some of the content are WP:CFORK, majority of the content are still distinct enough, thus no redirect is needed.
I have to add also that Usedtobecool should have asked for consensus before doing the redirection, and Curious km to be calmer, this is not about "challenge" or about calling other editor doing "non-sense" as we all should engage in good faith with one another. SunDawntalk 15:48, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@SunDawn, Thanks for your reply! There should have been a search for consensus. This is not a singe article of its kind. I accept that i should have been calmer. let's leave this article as it is and as many are available of similar kind. But, I repeat;"I am sure keep will win to redirect in respective wikiprojects."Curious km (talk) 16:20, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is quite common for previous state structures to get their own articles, even if there is direct continuity with a new state structure. Such an article allows for elements unique to that structure, most obviously the government and administrative structures, as well as other elements that may have changed in time since then, such as Economy, Demographics, etc. It also provides a nice holding location to discuss a specific period of history, as the current country articles tend to take history as a process from the beginning of history to the present instead of being restricted to the state structure. As such, the concept of the article is sound. However, I would agree the current structure is odd. The time period here runs to 2008, so there's a good chance not much too significant has changed in many aspects. (Geography being the most obvious example.) Much of the article is also written in present tense. I think the current article took shape with this 2015 edit, which added (potentially copied from elsewhere) a lot of content on to what was previously mostly a history page. (Originally the page appears to have been a list of kings, but other pages cover that now.) My suggestion would be to remove the present tense sections, which are likely redundant to elsewhere, and then assess what might be added on a case by case basis. For example, this would be a good location to summarise administrative divisions as per Former administrative units of Nepal, however this is not done well by the current present-tense section. CMD (talk) 03:27, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I still think it's redundant, but your suggestion is acceptable for the moment. So, I'll give it a shot. See where it goes from there. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:45, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:40, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't gorkha and Nepal kingdom same?

[edit]

arent gorkha and Nepal kingdom the same kingdoms? TuberGotTubed (talk) 13:19, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kingdom_of_Nepal&oldid=1234457255"