Difference between revisions of "Talk:Nepal"
Revision as of 03:19, 12 June 2007
"GYANENDRA" is written in all caps as if it were his family name. It isn't; as I understand it, it's his given name, and his family name is "Bir Bikram". -phma 06:06, 6 Dec 2003 (PST)
i am a nepali. Gyanendra is his first name and shah his last name, and also the name of the dynasty. 'Bir Bikram' is just a middle name. The first king of Nepal, as a kingdom, was Prithvi Narayan Shah, Narayan being his middle name and Shah his last name. just to prove a point.
"Dev" means "deity". It may be tacked on because of the belief that the king is divine. This only applies to the current king. Dead kings have outlived divinity and crown princes don't have it yet. LADave 02:06, 8 June 2007 (EDT)
We're not really disputing the facts in the CIA World Factbook 2002 import, are we? B-) I've stripped the CIA factbook crap off this article -- it needed to be done -- and moved it to Talk:Nepal/CIA World Factbook 2002 import. --Evan 10:25, 6 Dec 2003 (PST)
Hmm, I dont think I agree with moving the whole Volunteer in Nepal article into the Nepal article. It was never part of the Nepal page before. We have seperate travel issue articles for driving in different places, etc, so there is a precedent for detailed info. I'd include a graph or two about it on the Nepal page of course... but there is a difference between the travel info and the travel topic. Majnoona 23:32, 25 Mar 2004 (EST)
I'm all for the big warning at the top, but is there some way to deal with the crummy layout? There's about two pages of white space along the side-bar... I don't get wikimarkup enough to do anything about it, but maybe just moving the sidebar down or something? Help? Majnoona 10:56, 8 Feb 2005 (EST)
Not mention of the civil war?
The article fails to mention that about 60% of the country is under Maoist-rebel controll and that sporadic firefights occur near military bases. There should be quite an extensive section added to it. --18.104.22.168 20:11, 13 Feb 2006 (EST)
The Parliament has been reinstated by the popular movement in April 2006 (the Jana Andolan-II) So the type of the government should be changed in the Infoox.22.214.171.124 04:30, 17 May 2006 (EDT)
Regarding the latest addition, are you sure it's a punishable offense to carry the notes, or just unwise? My understanding was that, due to excessive counterfeiting, they were just pretty hard to get rid of... but this is the first I've heard of it being illegal... – cacahuate talk 16:35, 18 April 2007 (EDT)
there is nothing else to drink than alcoholic drinks?
The following comments were added to my Talk page by contributor David. WindHorse 01:06, 6 June 2007 (EDT)
The government's super-zones must have been set up for administrative convenience. They lack geographic, historical & cultural validity. Of course travelers might be better equipped to deal with the bureaucracy if they are somewhat familiar with the government's schema. So let's leave this scheme alone for bureaucratic purposes.
However for other travel purposes it made more sense to me to organize things by drainage basins: (1) Kosi in the east, (2) Bagmati (Kathmandu Valley), (3) most of the Gandaki basin, (4) (west) Rapti and Babai basins and stuff north of them (technically in the Gandaki and Karnali/Bheri basins) through the Dhaulagiri range and valleys behind, and (5) the remainder of the Karnali/Bheri basin and Mahakali up to the Indian border. Perhaps these could be called Kosi, Bagmati, Gandaki, Rapti-Dhaulagiri, and Karnali-Mahakali Regions.
For travel purposes it seemed really unnatural to divide Mid-West and Far-west at the Karnali River! Nepalis and trekkers quickly get across rivers via primitive ferryboats or bridges. Major drainage divides -- these tend to be high ridges -- make more sense than rivers as boundaries. Getting up to these ridges can be a serious hike! Nepalis are as practical as anyone else and try to avoid it, thus drainage divides are cultural divides too.
The way I did it has more historical validity too. Khas peoples speaking the progenitor of Nepali developed their core identity in the Mahakali and Karnali/Bheri basins. They detoured around the Babai/Rapti basins into the Gandaki basin to settle and grow rice. Prithvi Narayan appears there in the 1700s and heads east to conquer the Bagmati region (Kathmandu valley), then the Kosi region beyond. He or his heirs also consolidate the rest of the country -- the "Chaubisi" (24 principality confederation of the Gandaki basin) and the "Baisi" (22 principality confederation of the Karnali/Bheri basin).
Each river-oriented region can also be subdivided by elevation into Terai (Madesi and Tharu), Lower hills (Brahman-Chhetri), upper hills (Magar, Gurung, Tamang, etc.), then Bhote (Tibetan). It may be a little complicated, but travelers exposed to this stuff will be better prepared for "ground truth".
The new district designations are very practical and helpful, and as a frequent visitor to Nepal, your efforts are appreciated. It should be a final goal, however, to produce a totally new hierarchy to replace the government designated zones, and so we could keep the information on the front page short and succinct (like perhaps Bhutan or even India). Do think we could use your list as it stands? It needs to be kept to no more than nine places max (which it is). Under this hierarchy, where are the Solu Khumbu and Dolpo regions. Presumably they are classified under Himalaya? This article might be helpful: Wikitravel:Geographical hierarchy#Regions. Maybe some of the more popular tourist areas could be mentioned in the blurb. What do you think? However, I replaced the dab for Pashupatinath and Dakshinkali as these are just temple complexes, not destinations with hotels like Boudhanath. Please see: Wikitravel:What is an article?. Anyway, thanks for all your input. Your practical knowledge is very helpful. So, at the moment, do you want to replace the original list with your new hierarchy? That is fine with me. We can tweak as we go along. WindHorse 01:09, 7 June 2007 (EDT)
Moved my detailed discussion of regions to ;Understand' section and put capsule summaries in 'Regions'. I hope this improves flow of this article: lay out key concepts first, develop them later. I also added topic headers under 'Understand' for future development. LADave 14:20, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Hi Dave, thanks for continuing to add your knowledge and insights to the Nepal page. It is looking good. However, Wikitravel has a policy that lists of places (cities, other destinations etc) should not exceed nine, and so I have removed 4 of the places you recently added to the list. Sorry about that. Anyway, please check to see if you agree with my choice of deletions. The cities that are listed should be chosen by their popularity with tourists, and is drawn up to give them easy access to info, like an index. It is not a promotion of places. Obviously, KTM, Pokhara, Patan, Bhaktapur and Namche Bazaar should be listed, but the others are open. Also, the info on the front page should be kept succinct (see India and Bhutan as examples), and more in depth info should be placed on the actual articles themselves. Anyway, thanks for all your efforts. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me or one of the regular contributors. Take it easy. WindHorse 21:08, 8 June 2007 (EDT) Ps. you might find the info on this page of use: Wikitravel: Manual of style
So now we have kind of a matrix: south to north and west to east. I think we need to explain both. The south to north is obviously important in understanding the geography. West to east explains the flow of history, as well as certain aspects of geography.
Most treks are along the north-south axis, along rivers and streams. Going east or west means going against the grain with a lot more up and down. Exceptions might be Trisuli(Nuwakot)-Gorkha-Pokhara, Baglung-Dhorpatan(-Jumla), and the Terai or Inner-Terai. This seems to argue for a structure like this:
* Mahakali, Karnali-Bheri, (west) Rapti region o Terai, Siwaliks and Inner Terai o Mahabharat Range and Hills o Himalaya o transHimalaya * Gandaki o (repeat elevation structure) * Bagmati o Kathmandu Valley * Kosi o (repeat elevation structure without transhimalaya)
Probably the text about regions can be boiled down some. However after looking at the India article, I don't think the Nepal article has gotten too long. Bhutan is far simpler.
OK, Let's collapse Kathmandu, Patan and Bhaktapur into a single entry. Something like "Kathmandu (the capital) and its satellite cities Patan and Bhaktapur. Also we can delete Biratnagar, Birganj and Nepalganj in that top-level city list because they are transportation hubs, not tourist destinations. Transportation hubs can be dealt with regionally and in conjunction with itineraries.
For the western half of the country, I would add Tansen, Gorkha (possibly combined with Pokhara) and maybe Jumla. This leaves slots open for tourist destinations in eastern Nepal besides Namche. I hardly know eastern Nepal at all, so let others advocate for their faves.
BTW, -gunj endings (Birgunj, Nepalgunj) break with conventions for transliterating devanagari into roman and should be changed to 'ganj'. 'U' in a transliterated word should always rhyme with 'moo', but the sound we call a 'short u' gets transliterated as 'a', which must be where the confusion arose. 126.96.36.199 05:13, 10 June 2007 (EDT)
Hi Dave, I notice that you have changed all the regions. It looks good. However, does the new hierarchy cover the whole country in its entirety? In addition, the new regions will need to be linked to new articles and any useful information from the previous regional articles transferred to these pages. Furthermore, if there is an overlap, the previous regional articles can be redirected to the new pages, but if they are totally incompatible, then we need to submit them for deletion. I think with the new hierarchy, we can perhaps omit the district articles, except with a few famous ones like 'Solu-Khumbu' and just concentrate on the main centers of population. What do you think? Also, we need to replace the original list of regional names, such as Annapurna, Everest, Dolpo etc on the front page as people will look for these. Thanks for all your hard work, and let me know what I can do to help to complete the new set up. WindHorse 00:18, 11 June 2007 (EDT)
Hi Windhorse, The new regional workup is comprehensive. Perhaps a workup on himalayan subranges and noteworthy peaks should be worked into the Understand section. Are there other titles we could ad to 'Understand' to try to solicit contributions? Maybe if we put in 'Mountaineering' someone would actually write it up.
I have linked to all articles I am aware of, except some development region articles that have almost no content. But there may be articles I don't know about yet. If you could post a list, I'll link to any with significant content.
I modified the reference to the food poisoning article slightly. It's a good article with a misleading title. Food poisoning is what you get when food isn't kept hot or cold enough to retard bacterial growth, so toxic metabolic byproducts build up. Botulism would be an extreme example. Treatment is mostly about getting the toxins out of the body or neutralizing them. The article lumps this with issues that might be called 'fecal-oral contamination'. Poor sanitation gets specific disease-causing organisms, cysts or eggs into your body via food and drink. Then treatment tends to involve killing off the organisms that are trying to multiply in your body.
Tropical medicine also seems like a misnomer because Nepal is subtropical, and by the time you reach Kathmandu it's borderline temperate. This rules out many tropical diseases. Some of it still applies, so I kept the link but put it further down in the subtopic. 188.8.131.52 05:53, 11 June 2007 (EDT)