Talk:Gyanendra of Nepal/Archive 1

Archive 1

Honours

It would be very hepful if someone could let me know whether the present King or his successors ever receievd decorations from the UK Sovereign. Thanks.

Gyanendra was invested as a Knight Grand Cross of the British Order of St. Michael and St. George in 1986. AFAIK Gyanendra has not had any successors yet. :-) Mapple 14:34, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Incarnation?

Please fix the paragraphs above this sentence: "Given these circumstances, people have lost most of the faith they had in the monarch as an incarnation of the god."

...it never mentioned anything about him being an incarnation of any god. So it'd be nice to elaborate on that. (I know, it's Vishnu, but from the article no one can know that.)

Pronunciation?

The BBC switched from pronouncing him [dʒa'nɛndrə] to ['gi:aˌnɛndrə] a few months ago, VOA says "g(y)ah-NEHN-dreh". So which is it? If you know, please add the IPA to the article.--84.188.147.149 11:33, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

BBC reporters frequently butcher names, e.g. "Kim Yong-il". I'm inclined to believe VOA, which goes by the individual's own pronunciation where available. Gazpacho 19:34, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Its probably ['gi:aˌnɛndrə] . The trouble is that the first character in his name is the only letter in nepali that isn't exactly the same as the equivalent hindi/sanskrit character. The BBC probably got confused because this character looks a lot like the [dʒ] character in sanskrit/hindi/nepalese.

It's [gyanendrV] (X-SAMPA) (primary stress on second syllable, secondary on first, I think), in Nepali. [gy{nEndr\@] is probably the pronunciation which would be most found in English. 82.10.98.240 22:13, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[y] (front closed rounded vowel) doesn't exist in English...--Sonjaaa 16:57, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Stop going against Gyanendra, there is Nepal in front of us. Enough with the protests, demonstrations, promises, propagandas, patriotic songs, political brags and every useless stuffs, its time we all contribute to make NEPAL better. At least, realize how back Nepal is from the rest of the world. Try to seek the reason behind Nepalese people seeking asylum in other countries. Make Nepal better, lovable and survivable for all the Nepalese. Every Nepali dreams of living in Nepal, dying in Nepal and seing Nepal peaceful. But, its time to act now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.218.15.14 (talk) 23:10, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Crown Prince?

Gyanendra (as heir-presumptive) during King Dipendra's 3-day reign, didn't have the title Crown Prince. The title CP is reserved for an heir-apparent (the King's son), as King Dipendra had no sons, there was no crown prince. GoodDay 22:18, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Date of Birth

Princess Prerana Rajya Laxmi Devi (Born February 29, 1978) - No she wasn't. That year WAS NOT a leap year. Anyone know the correct DoB? Arcturus 20:03, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

According to Almanach de Bruxelles (and a bunch of webpages about the royal family of Nepal) the princess was born February 29, 1978. Since that date obviously is incorrect, the correct date must be March 1, 1978.

It's February 20, 1978 (Fagun 9, 2034).[1] FrinkMan 10:23, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Two Gyanendras?

Why does it say at the bottom of the article that he was king in 2001 and in the 1950s? That obviously can't [be] right. Maybe there was another King Gyanendra in the 50s, I don't know. Can someone fix this please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Semper15 (talk • contribs) 01:03, 23 April 2006

He was crowned as a child in the 1950s when his grandfather fled to India.--Grammatical error 15:54, 24 April 2006 (UTC) Actually he was left behind by mistake(or some conspiracy??) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kshitiz123 (talk • contribs) 02:53, 19 March 2011 (UTC) In 1950 his grand father King Tribuvan went exiled to India with crown prince Mahendra and eldest son of the crown prince Birendra, Gyanendra who was third in line to succession left in Nepal, Because of King and first two in succession order left Nepal, Gyanendra was proclaimed King, Following year Rana prime ministers power was broken down and Tribuvan back to Nepal as King.Chamika1990 (talk) 00:35, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Early life

The text says the infant Gyanendra was declared king for two months (1950–1951). However, if he was born in July 1947, he would have been 3 1/2 years old. Isn't that a little old to be considered an infant? In comman usage, isn't an infant typically less than one year old? 19 May 2006 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.104.20.13 (talk • contribs) 21:13, 19 May 2006

Gyanendra's 2nd reign

Can we please wait until April 2008? Gyanendra could abdicate or die before then or the monarchy might be retained. We should be patient folks. GoodDay (talk) 20:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Totally agree the monarchy will most likely end after the elections but lets just wait for it officially take place before stating it as a fact that his reign will end in April 2008. - dwc lr (talk) 22:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Photo

Why is it that we only have drawings up on this page? There must be a public domain photo somewhere. --68.42.150.176 (talk) 14:34, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

• Heres a Photo! http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl2222/images/20051104001007801.jpg
• Im not a 1337wixstor, but I did googel Gyanendra of Nepal and did click images. M6arate (talk) 18:48, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

ज्ञानेन्द्रलाई नारायणहिटीबाट उठाइएको त्यो रात

पर्शुराम काफ्ले

मध्यरात भईसकेको थियो । हामी सिंहदरबारभित्रै थियौँ । हामी सिंहदरबारभित्रै थियौँ । प्रधानमन्त्री मोहनशमशेरका हजुरिया कर्नेल सन्तबहादुर अधिकारीले मलाई बोलाए-'मेजर ! ' त्यसपछि आदेश दिए- 'स्ट्यान्ड टु गारद !' म त्यतिबेला जगदल पल्टनको तीन पट्टी, दुई नम्बरमा भर्ती भएको थिएँ । भर्ती भएपछि म प्रधानमन्त्री मोहनशमशेरको आठपहरिया बसेको हुँ, उनी हुन्जेल सँगै बसेँ ।

त्यस रातको कुरा हुँदै थियो । यस्तो आदेश हतपत आउँदैनथ्यो, गम्भीर प्रकृतिको घटना विशेषमा मात्रै आउने गथ्र्यो । केही बेरपछि त हरिशमशेरका जेठा छोरा जर्नेल अरुणशमशेर पनि आइपुगे सिंहदरबारमा । हामी अरुणशमशेरलाई शम्भु जर्साब पनि भन्थ्यौँ । हामीलाई त खुल्दुली भो, अब के हुन आँट्यो भनेर ! त्यस रात सिंहदरबारमा जर्नेल अरुणशमशेर, कर्नेल सन्तबहादुर, मेजर बलबहादुर -थानकोट), कप्तान कुलबहादुर -महाराजगन्ज्ा), सुबेदार मेजर गंगाबहादुर, अर्का एक जम्दार र चारजना सिपाही थिए । अरू पनि थिए होला, मैले नाम बिर्सें ।

सरकारको आदेशअनुसार लाजिम्पाटका कुलबहादुरले तीनवटा गाडी तयार गरे । तर, हामीलाई कहाँ र किन जाँदै छौँ भनेर सुइँको पनि थिएन । हामीलाई फेरि अर्को आदेश आयो- तिमीहरूले जुन हतियार प्रयोग गरेका छौ, त्यो साथमै राख्नू । म त हतियार चलाउन सिपालु थिएँ । जस्तो हतियार पनि चलाउन आउँथ्यो किन भने मैले सैनिक स्कुलमा ६ पाठ सकेको थिएँ । मैले २८ राउन्डको टोमी गन बोकेँ । हामी स्ट्यान्ड बाई नै थियौँ । मध्यरातमा कहाँ जान लागिएको होला भन्ने खुल्दुली त सकिएकै थिएन । हामील्ो सोध्ने कुरा पनि आउँदैनथ्यो । जर्नेल अरुणशमशेरको अगुवाइमा हाम्रो टोली १२ बजे राति सिंहदरबारबाट हिँड्यो । भद्रकाली र महांकाललाई दाहिने पारेर हाम्रा तीन गाडी नारायणहिटी राजदरबारको गेटमा पुगे । मध्यरातमा तीनवटा गाडी एक्कासि झ्याप्प रोकिएपछि नारायणहिटी दरबारको सिपाहीले बन्दुक तेस्र्यायो । ऊ पनि छक्क पर्‍यो होला नि ! मध्यरातमा गेटमा गाडी रोकिएपछि ऊ पोजिसनमा बस्यो । अरुण जर्साप हत्तपत्त गाडीबाट झरेर हात उठाए । 'तैँले मलाई चिनिस् ?' अरुणले नारायणहिटी राजदरबारको गेटमा खटिएको र बन्दुक तेस्र्याएर बसेको सिपाहीलाई सोधे । 'चिनिनँ,' सिपाहीले जवाफ दियो । 'म हरिशमशेरको जेठो छोरो अरुणशमशेर हुँ, ल ढोका खोल् !' अरुणको आदेशपछि सैनिकले ढोका खोल्यो । अरुण जर्सापले अरू के-के भने, मलाई थाहा छैन । त्यसपछि पो थाहा भो, हामी नारायणहिटी राजदरबार जाँदै रहेछौँ । तर, त्यहाँ पनि मध्यरातमा किन जान लागेको हो भन्ने केही थाहा पाइएन । नारायणहिटी दरबारभित्रको पूर्वपट्टकिो मोहोडामा हामीले गाडी रोक्यौँ । त्यहाँको एउटा गेटबाट घरमा पसेर ज्ञानेन्द्र सुतेको खोपीमा पुग्यौँ । एउटा घरको माथिल्लो तल्लाजस्तो लाग्छ, हामी सरासर उक्लियौँ । अरुण जर्साप अघिअघि र हामी पछिपछि थियौँ । ढोकाभित्र हामी छिर्‍यौँ । बालक ज्ञानेन्द्र सरकार मस्त निदाइरहेका थिए । उनलाई बुबु धाई -दूध पिलाउन राखिएकी कामदार) ले सुताएकी थिइन् । दाहिनेपट्टकिो कोठामा ज्ञानेन्द्रका सुसारेहरू सुतेका थिए । हाम्रो टोली पुगेपछि सुसारेहरू बिउँझिए । अरुण जर्सापले मस्त निद्रामा रहेका ज्ञानेन्द्रलाई 'भान्जा !' भनेर बोलाए । निदाइरहेका ज्ञानेन्द्र बिउँझिए । र, उनलाई अरुण जर्सापले च्याप्प बोके । त्यसपछि जर्सापले ज्ञानेन्द्रलाई मेरो हातमा थमाए । मैले केहीबेर बोेकेपछि एकजना धाईलाई दिएँ । उनैले बोकिन् पछिसम्म ।

अरुणशमशेर ज्ञानेन्द्रको ओच्छ्यान उठाउन धाई-सुसारेलाई भन्दै थिए । तर, धाईहरू त धुरधुर रुन पो थाले, घरै थर्किने गरी । पछि जर्सापले धाईहरूलाई सम्झाए- तिमीहरू रुनुपर्दैन । हामी सिंहदरबार लिएर जान्छौँ । केही पनि हुँदैन, चिन्ता नगर । ज्ञानेन्द्रको ओच्छ्यान उठाइयो । जर्सापले तीनजना धाईलाई पनि आफ्ना सरसमान बोकेर हिँड्न भने । त्यसपछि तीनजना धाईसहित ज्ञानेन्द्रलाई लिएर नारायणहिटीभित्रबाट हामी हिँड्यौँ । इतिहासकारले त्यस दिन ज्ञानेन्द्र मावली हरिशमशेरको दरबारमा थिए भन्छन् । तर, त्यो सरासर झूटो हो । म आफैं साक्षी छु, ज्ञानेन्द्र नारायणहिटी राजदरबारमा थिए । उनलाई त्रिभुवन सरकारले किन लगेनन्, त्यो मलाई थाहा भएन । तर, उनी हरिशमशेरको दरबारमा थिएनन् । हामीले नै नारायणहिटीको खोपीबाट उनलाई निकालेका हौँ ।'

ज्ञानेन्द्रलाई बोकेर तल झरेपछि हामी गाडीमा बस्यौँ । तीनवटामध्ये अघिल्लो गाडीमा बलबहादुर मेजर र दुईजना आठपहरिया बसे । बीचको गाडीमा जर्साप -अरुणशमशेर), तीनजना धाईसँगै बालक ज्ञानेन्द्र र म बस्यौँ । पछिल्लो गाडीमा कुलबहादुर कप्तान, सुबेदार जंगबहादुर र अर्को एउटा आठपहरिया बसे । भद्रकाली र महांकाललाई देब्रे पारेर ज्ञानेन्द्रलाई लिएर हामी सिंहदरबार पुग्यौँ । त्यस्तै ४५ मिनेटको बीचमा होला हामी फर्कियौँ । ए, साँच्चि ! ज्ञानेन्द्र बिउँझै थिए, तर रोइकराई केही प्ानि गरेनन् । सिंहदरबारको गेटबाट छिरेपछि दुईवटा गाडी पछि राखियो । ज्ञानेन्द्रसहित जर्साप र म चढेको गाडी भित्रै पुग्यो । भित्र पुगेपछि तीनैजना धाई ओर्ले । ज्ञानेन्द्रलाई पनि ओरालियो । जर्साप पनि ओर्लेपछि सबैजना घरभित्र पसे, म बाहिर निस्केँ । त्यसपछि के भो, मलाई थाहा भएन । पछि पो थाहा भो, त्रिभुवनले गद्दी छाडेर भागेपछि ज्ञानेन्द्रलाई राजा बनाइएको रहेछ । —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.67.222.171 (talk) 07:08, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

In english, please? GoodDay (talk) 17:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

this is unnecessary talk. delete it. nirmal (talk) 05:14, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Monarchy- A must for an Sovereign and Independent Nepal

The monarch as an individual and the monarchy as an institution are separate issues which must be understood when debating this issue for Nepal.

The monarch as an individual could be wrong and may have handled issues roughly but that should not mean the system or institution as a whole should be abolished. We could find many leaders and rulers failing to meet the needs of their nation in countries where there are democratic systems. It would be quite illogical to blame the system or constitution for the performance of a particular person.

There is no logic for blaming current leaders or the monarchy, for failing the constitution of 1990. The only weak-point I see is the lack of flexibility to incorporate the wishes of the people by referendum, but that could be reformed by national consensus.

Unfortunately, due to lack of statesmanship and greatly inspired by external forces, the current leaders have chosen a wrong and suicidal path, dismantling bases of unity, territorial integrity and national stability, by adopting the federal republic. The Monarchy has been a great source for building a united greater Nepal and it contributed to the democratic movement as well by ceasing Rana autocratic rule.

Some see the monarchy as evil but large number of Nepalese believe the monarchy is necessary to Nepal from the geopolitics and multi-cultural diversity point of view. The wider and unexpected anarchic situation could not be easily prevented without the institution of monarchy. Removing the monarchy from a nation-building campaign would invite a great and unthinkable threat and challenges to Nepal's long term sustainability as a separate independent nation.

Some sort of affordable space, in which executive power could be excluded, is very much needed to provide for the institution of monarchy in Nepal. The positions of Sikkim and Bhutan, regarding their 1949 Darjeeling Agreement should be considered.

We still have time, since the permanent constitution has not yet been drafted and all that has been done so far is based on the interim ( Temporary management )constitution which has not been endorsed by the people.

Let's believe that creating an acceptable and affordable space for the institution of monarchy, without executive authority, is a wise and broad step that would help national unity and the long term future of the independent nation, Nepal. There is no need to worry about the misuse of authority by the Monarchy when it is a symbolic and guardianship entity, that unifies the people and delivers the message of a separate nation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.79.40.136 (talk) 10:57, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Removal of the entire 'Possible causes leading to end of monarchy' section

I propose removing that entire section because:

• It expresses a distinct POV, and falls afoul of WP's neutral point-of-view (NPOV) policy or WP's practice of being impartial.
• Too much of it is speculation or personal opinion. Mentions of 'should have' and 'If he had...' type comments throughout the text.
• Even if this is from a news source, it would seem to be a poor source for an encyclopedia article based on verifiable facts and not opinion or speculation.
• I started to remove the parts that falls afoul of various WP policies but was left with a skeleton of a section with very little good meat on it. Best to remove it entirely.
• 'Possible causes' is speculation, which is poor form for an encyclopedia. That would be more suitable for a WikiNews story, but not the main Wikipedia.
• It references a single 'hometown' newspaper story but doesn't contain actual verifiable citations for various things alleged in the section, which is problematic.
• Quite a few statements in it is clearly biased towards specific political viewpoints - not very balanced.

I would like to give that section's editor(s) and others here an opportunity to express a different perspective or otherwise convince me that I'm misinterpreting the WP policies here, before I or another editor actually remove it. I feel the rest of the article sufficiently covers actual well-documented facts and situations leading to the end of his rule without the lopsided one-sided POV, opinion, or speculation, so a speculative section is not really needed. Cheers, 64.209.16.204 (talk) 02:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree. I know nothing about Nepalese politics, and this was interesting, but all of the above criticisms are IMO very valid --64.142.36.76 (talk) 08:07, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree also. You don't have to be an expert on Nepalese politics or Wikipedia principles to see that this entire section has a very distinct point of view to push. It's hard to see how this section could be edited in any way that would make it neutral. It has to go. 62.25.109.195 (talk) 10:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Exit and end of dynasty

I added this moment of the end:Gyanendra (incarnation of the Hindu god Vishnu) moved out of the Narayanhiti in Kathmanduon June 11, 2008, after release of press statement (5 p.m.) into the Nagarjuna palace. The new residence comprises 10 buildings including the ex-royals’ residence (Hemanta Bas), 3 guest houses (Barsha Bas, Sharad Bas and Grishma Bas), one office secretariat and one staff quarters. His family will reside at the 2-storey Hemanta Bas. The palace became a museum, while Gyanendra's diamond and ruby-encrusted crown and royal scepter with all the other crown jewels and royal assets,would become government property. Now ordinary citizens, Gyanendra Shah’s and wife, former queen Komal’s departure would be a “major symbolic moment in the fall of the Shah dynasty, which unified Nepal in the 1760s.”BBC NEWS, Former Nepal king to leave palacethaindian.com, Former King Gyanendra prepares to leave Narayanhiti Palace Journalist Surya Thapa, who wrote 3 books on the Himalayan royals, stated that Mr. Shah had $ 195 million “stashed inside Nepal and even more abroad, much of it in the name of his daughter and wife.” Gyanendra's son Paras also transferred into a private residence in Kathmandu's diplomatic quarter.timesonline.co.uk, Nepal's King Gyanendra moves out of palace, home to royal family for 100 years--Florentino floro (talk) 09:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Name

The BBC is reporting[2] that he will henceforth be known as "Gyanendra Shah". Should the title of the article be changed?

Soviet Canuckistan (talk) 22:22, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Although I agree that since the monarchy was abolished, and Nepal is now a republic; it should also be noted that there is no constitution in place for Nepal at this time, as they Constituent Assembly will be drafting a new one. With that noted, there are no laws in place that specifically state that royal titles are not recognized in the country. Along with that, Gyanendra is technically a "commoner", but by the doctrine of the devine right of kings, he should continue to enjoy the title as an honour and a priviledge. An example of this would be Constintine of Greece. When the monarchy was abolished in Greece, he was known after that as King of the Hellenes. His surname is technically "of Greece", "de Greca" on his passport. Therefore, the "King of Nepal" title is an honour for Gyanendra since he did not abdicate his throne or his title, and technically he never "officially" recognized Nepal as a republic. He should be known as "His Majesty, Gyanendra, the former King of Nepal". Seems everyone wants to give him the boot just because Nepal became a a republic. But, he was in the position he was booted from. So therefore, he should still get the respect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.192.77.113 (talk) 01:56, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

That's Original research. There's a reliable source that states the former king is now known as Gyanendra Shah so we should go with that rather than make our own determinations about how to interpret Nepal's constitution. Reggie Perrin (talk) 02:05, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

WP:NCNT say Gyanendra of Nepal should be used unless he is better known by something else. This should be put through a WP:RM. - dwc lr (talk) 08:09, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Former king?

User:Surtsicna removed the term "former" and noted that there's no need for that term, comparing the case to Queen Victoria. I'd suggest there is a difference, since Queen Victoria reigned until her death whereas Gyanendra's reign was ended differently, and he is still alive. What do other editors think? --AndrewHowse (talk) 20:11, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Both Gyanendra and Queen Victoria were de jure and de facto monarchs at some point of their lives. Juliana of the Netherlands did not reign until her death, but she is not known as former Queen of the Netherlands. There are numerous other examples, including Juliana's own mother, Edward VIII of the United Kingdom, etc. His status as former King can be explained by the lead sentence, while the infobox's title entry should not indicate the person's present status (if a person was downgraded, of course). Surtsicna (talk) 20:26, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. I think I misunderstood your intent. Sorry. --AndrewHowse (talk) 21:03, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Don't be sorry, I know you meant well. Surtsicna (talk) 21:12, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Holy POV, Batman!

This article is unabashedly biased in favor of the subject. The writing suggests that a good deal of the text comes from non-native English speakers, which leads me to speculate that it may be coming from local sympathizers of the monarchy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.105.224.161 (talk • contribs)

Hey Buddy!!! The article is not biased but is based on fact. His Majesty is still highly revered as the incarnation of Lord Bishnu. Just because those fucking communists abolished the monarchy doesnot necessarily mean that His Majesty is very unpopular among the people. Large number of Nepalese still believe that monarchy will be reinstated and Nepal.

Take it easy Your Majesty! The Nationalists are with you, Always!! One for all, All for ONE!!

Jay desh! Jay Naresh! (For all you English babus this means Hail Thy Nation, Hail Your Majesty) (unsigned)

The funny thing about all this is that the King of Nepal abdicated through democratic means, not through a coup. Also, a Nepali speaking english? With a computer? Upper class, much? NnBosko (talk) 03:04, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Excuse me, haven't the maoists won a bloody terrorist war? СЛУЖБА (talk) 21:27, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Image

Monk820 (talk · contribs) has not done anything else on Wikipedia except upload the image of Gyanendra, and doesn't respond to questions. Should he be taken at his word, that he made what appears to be an official state photograph? WillOakland (talk) 21:50, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

question

Hello, Trying to redirect this page to the more appropriate Gyanendra Shah, but looks like my account-privileges don't allow this!! Some other member had also voice his comments in line of mine, and looks like he got plenty of warning too. Please redirect this page to Gyanendra Shah. Will give it another try now!! Riteshlamsal (talk) 11:50, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Wrong. You tried to copy and paste the article there what is unconstructive, since the article history will get lost then. Also it is unconstructive to remove redirect tags. That's why both of you got warned. If you continue in doing so you will get blocked.

I also have a question. Half a year ago it was requested to reverse the redirect to its actual state. Before it was exactly as you wish it to be. What has happened since? --Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord² 12:13, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

This should clearly be put through a WP:RM. - dwc lr (talk) 16:00, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

hexaChord, sorry for the trouble. But here is my problem. This page Gyanendra of Nepal is a page on the last ruling King of Nepal, a supposedly high profile personality. But the title Gyanendra of Nepal is insensitive, and lacks a sense of courtesy, which NO pages on Wiki should be. I earlier wrote on your talk page about this - let me re-iterate and make an analogy for others to get the message - Re-directing Gyanendra Shah to Gyanendra of Nepal is like redirecting the page on Bill Clinton to Bill of USA or Winston Churchill to Winston of Great Britain. Even Osama bin Laden is NOT re-directed to Osama of al-Qaeda or Osama of Saudi Arabia (excuse me but I mean no offense against anybody). This is particularly true because the first name of the former king without the last name Shah is never used in current Nepali publications (I can cite references if that is deemed necessary). I hope the admins get the picture clearly and redirect it appropriately, i.e. Gyanendra of Nepal re-directed to Gyanendra Shah and NOT the other way round. It is only common sense, I feel! Regards, VividTara (talk) 06:37, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Winston Churchill, Bill Clinton and Osama bin Laden were not monarchs. See WP:NCNT for how kings and emperors are titled on wikipedia. - dwc lr (talk) 12:20, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. I get the point, but I have one more question - Former King Gyanendra Shah, is NOW a common man - much like you and me! He is a common man (albeit rich and (un)popular), and holds no executive/administrative power whatsoever in Nepal. I fully agree with the naming system for emperors and kings and those who die as emperors and kings : but this situation is different. Here's a man, who was ONCE a king, but now leads a simple-man's life and speculations are rife that he may enter Nepali politics sometime very soon to fight elections !!! This is a pretty unique situation - does the naming system still hold true in such cases? I hope I am not bothering you too much! Regards,VividTara (talk) 15:34, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

At the moment he is best known for being a king. Other living ex kings are still titled the same as Gyanendra, Constantine II of Greece, Michael of Romania. If Gyanendra does enter politics and is successful then there may be a case to change the title of the article such as Simeon II of Bulgaria, whose article is now titled Simeon Saxe-Coburg-Gotha because he is better known for being the countries prime minister. - dwc lr (talk) 15:51, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks...VividTara (talk) 12:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

"...is the last king of Nepal"

The tense of this opening sentence doesn't seem right to me. The present tense implies that he is still king. I think it should be changed to "was," which wouldn't imply that he was dead or anything, only that he wasn't king anymore. For instance, the lede sentence for Constantine II of Greece says that he "was King of the Hellenes from 1964 until the abolition of the monarchy in 1973." Any objections? --Jfruh (talk) 12:49, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, now.

I've stripped a honking lot from the article, but WP:BLP applies here; to quote from that policy, "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced — whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable — should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." (emphasis in the original) Some of those statements were tagged in December, and some as early as 2008, which for such a contentious public figure, the focal point of a coup abolishing a nation's form of government, is absurd. Any readdition of the deleted material must come with reliable sources.  Ravenswing  13:26, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Kingdom of Nepal.png Nominated for Deletion

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) 08:05, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

I have removed following paragraph

The following paragraph from Section "Recent developments after the demise of Constituent Assembly" has been removed. The referred source has no info about the website and Manisha Koirala.

On the same day the Constituent Assembly failed to deliver the constitution and its subsequent expiration, King Gyanendra's website for Nepal Monarchy appeared. Hindustan Times stated "Significantly, it was launched on May 27, the day the CA was dissolved and a day ahead of the fourth anniversary of Gyanendra’s deposition." The website also has a separate blog which many newspapers claimed to have been created by Bollywood actress and Nepal's first democratic prime minister's granddaughter Manisha Koirala.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Gyanendra 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080829161416/http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article1977459.ece to http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article1977459.ece

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:09, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Gyanendra 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081211104644/http://edition.cnn.com:80/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/south/06/08/nepal.royal.probe/index.html to http://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/south/06/08/nepal.royal.probe/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:13, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Gyanendra 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050203190027/http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/02/01/nepal.govt/ to http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/02/01/nepal.govt/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081007112957/http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2008/jun/jun02/news07.php to http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2008/jun/jun02/news07.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150928164627/http://members3.boardhost.com/Beneluxroyal/msg/1428764090.html to http://members3.boardhost.com/Beneluxroyal/msg/1428764090.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130120075833/http://www.nettyroyal.nl/nepal2.html to http://www.nettyroyal.nl/nepal2.html

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) 20:04, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gyanendra 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160117050801/http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2008/may/may28/news18.php to http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2008/may/may28/news18.php

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) 18:26, 26 October 2017 (UTC)