Talk:Gehendra Shumsher

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Gehendra Shumsher Jang Bahadur Rana. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160304221925/http://www.nepalmandal.org/blogs/kashinathtamot/2011/may/03/kaiser-shamsher-his-manuscript-collection-library-and-his-manuscrip to http://www.nepalmandal.org/blogs/kashinathtamot/2011/may/03/kaiser-shamsher-his-manuscript-collection-library-and-his-manuscrip

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 12:33, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Page move to just "Gehendra Shumsher"
Going by the WP:NAMINGCRITERIA, article titles are based on how reliable English-language sources refer to the article's subject. No English sources in my know normally refer to "Gehendra Shumsher" as "Gehendra Shumsher Jung Bahadur Rana"; rather they go just by "Gahendra Shusmher".

So holds true for the national textbooks throughout Nepal. For instance, the social studies textbook of Grade 7 includes a biography on Gehendra Shumsher. The chapter is titled "Nepal's First Scientist Gehendra Shumsher", but rarely does it mention "Gehendra Shumsher Jung Bahadur Rana" – even once.

In addition, conciseness is another criteria, which dictates that the title should be no longer than necessary to identify the article's subject and distinguish it from other subjects. "Gehendra Shumsher" is simply enough to identify the subject, and make it stand-out from others.

Now let's be clear what I am not arguing for. I am not arguing for the complete drop of his honorific suffix, Jang Bahadur Rana. I think we should incorporate it with his name as it appears in the lead section. My stand is only against the superfluous use of honorific suffix in article's title.

Another ground for the move is the naturalness of the new name. The title should be one that readers are likely to look or search for and that editors would naturally use to link to the article from other articles. Such a title usually conveys what the subject is actually called in English. If you look at the Google search terms, you can easily infer that people generally look for "Gehendra Shumsher", and never "Gehendra Shumsher Jung Bahadur Rana".

If there's one criteria that this move would violate, it's obviously consistency. All the similar articles carry "Jung Bahadur Rana" in the title, but the thing is this same line of argument holds true for others, too. By moving the page to "Gahendra Shumsher", I guess we can set a precedent to inspire future moves.

I would love to read your thoughts on this.

--Inimesh (talk) 02:00, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
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) 06:15, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Martini Henry Mk IV.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:02, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Martini Henry Mk IV.jpg