Talk:Gurkha/Archive 1

'sept 11 incident' is unspecific
"Before the incident of Sept 11, the GC was seldom seen in public. Nowsadays they can be seen patrolling the streets and replacing local policemen to guard key installations"

Reading the article, it's not clear what the 'incident of sept 11' is. Presumably the reference is to the attack on the USA in 2001, but this should be made clear.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Markhadman (talk • Sps) 03:57, 26 September 2005

'''Bappa Rawal was an Aryan Kshatriya from Rajasthan. He surely fought the Arabs. After the Rajputs and Brahmins of Rajasthan moved to Nepal fighting the Mughals, Nepal as a kingdom was eventually formed. Today the great Gorkhas depending on their caste have different origins. Some are pure Aryans, others are mixed Aryan-Mongol and others pure Mongol. Many of these castes are great fighters. However, they rarely if ever marry outside the caste as they follow the Bhagwad Gita on this.'''  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.88.88.173 (talk) 17:16, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Cleanup for the heading section?
The header section could use some clean-up, especially taking the references and grouping them in the end of the whole article. As of now, the heading is quite jumbled and hard to follow.

I am not bold enough, nor do I have the stylesheet at hand to effect the changes myself. --131.207.161.152 10:50, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Merge request
I have made a merger request in Duplicate_articles to merge Brigade of Gurkhas into this article. Reading through both articles unwittingly gives readers a sense of deja vu, as it did for me, because ulitimately one cant help talking about one without mentioning the other in-depth, since as I mentioned in the merge request, that Gurkhas are commonly formed in Brigades or similar organisations in armies where they are deployed in, and that was were they became famous. Combining the two articles should create a single, well-writtern article with an appriopriate length worthy for refinement into WP:FA status in future.--Huaiwei 22:02, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Disagree - the Brigade is the current British Army umbrella organisation for Gurkhas in the British Army. Gurkhas in general deserve another article - e.g. history of Gurkhas, Gurkhas in the Indian Army and in the Singapore Police Force.--jrleighton 07:24, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Then help to reduce the dublicating content to justify maintaining two articles. Brigade of Gurkhas seems to be rather lost in its scope...should it be discussing the organisation of Gurkhas in the British army in brigades, or should it actually talk about Gurkhas in the British army in general? If so, should the title be changed? As it stands, it seems to be talking too much about general issues which should be in this article.--Huaiwei 14:38, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Disagree too - Gurkhas have an active and distinct history in Modern India and Nepal - cf. the Darjeeling Gurkha movement which forced Nepali to become a national language of india, and created the Darjeeling Gurkha Hill Council. The Gurkha regiments article should focus on honours in war etc, for the gurkhas served prestigiously in the great wars, specially in Monty's North African campaign, in environment very different from their natural environs. I will try and remove some of the duplication, but I dont have idea about Gurkhas. Isnt there a nepali wikicommunity? Pradiptaray 07:45, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Falklands
There is no mention of their role in the Falklands War. Should there be? --Error 05:03, 16 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I once read that a group of Argentinian soldiers surrendered upon discovering they were up against the Gurkhas. If that event actually took place, for the reason stated, and there is a suitable reference, it should be in the article. 87.114.141.174 (talk) 22:49, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

History
The history has an unnecessarily distinct Hindu POV. It also mentions mythical/disputed places (like Mt. Meru)as if it is common knowledge. Needs to be cleaned up a little.

I declare that at least a wee bit of Druidic POV be included.Obbop (talk) 22:28, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

History
No offence meant, but the list of 'references'are affecting the 'flow' of the paragraph on Nepal's history. You may consider removing them and putting them lower down, after the article is over. Amar Chitra Katha comics don't make good references for 'history'. You might well make it 'Legends' - as the Amar Chitra Katha marks them. Can you also include mention about the Buddhist influence on Nepal? Please clean up your references too, you don't have the name of books mentioned clearly.

No merger please
Gurkha and Brigade of Gurkhas are two distinct and different topics. The former is about a social group of Indian subcontinent, mostly residing in Nepal, whereas the later is about the soldiers, mostly belonging to this social group. Merging the two is like merging an article on Sikhs with the Sikh Regiment or vice versa. Accordingly, I shall be removing the merger notice shortly. Further comments are invited. --Bhadani 14:08, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Totally agree. Gurkha or Gorkha is a small kingdom whose last ruler Prithvi Narayan (eventually Shah) launched a conquest movement that consolidated Nepal as a much larger nation. This family probably had Khas antecedents from the hill regions to the west, Rajput antecedents, and possibly also Kham or Magar antecedents, and was of the Kshatriya caste.

The rank and file of Prithvi Narayan's army was probably drawn from various hill tribes that already had or quickly developed martial traditions, especially Magar and Gurung, while officers were probably mainly Kshatriyas.

Prithvi Narayan's successors continued expanding their kingdom from the "hills" south into the Terai and west into Kumaon which brought them into conflict with the British; also north across the Himalayas into the borderlands of Tibet which brought them into conflict with China. The great powers eventually contained the upstart kingdom and reduced it more or less to its present size, but the kingdom's army had fought well. The British were particularly impressed the British and so part of the Anglo-Nepal peace settlement was permission to recruit mercenaries who came to be called "Gurkhas". Some of the recruits were "Chhetris" of largely Aryan extraction, but most came from hill tribes: Magar, Gurung, Tamang, and Rai.

The main article's statement that Gurkhas are Kshatriyas is actually controversial. To orthodox Hindus, a person must be Aryan to be a Kshatriya, whereas hill tribes are Tibeto-Burman. Furthermore the hill tribes are apt to eat pork and often water buffalo, which are strictly forbidden to the "clean castes".

Nevertheless members of hill tribes can be found who eschew the suspect foods, wear sacred threads, and claim Chhetri (Kshatriya) status. Evidently they are grafting indigenous martial (and perhaps also political) traditions of hill tribes onto the Hindu Kshatriya (warrior and ruler) ethos that has come up from the plains. Furthermore Chhetris in Nepal sometimes show signs of intermarriage between Aryans and Tibeto-Burmans while "Bahuns" (Brahmans) do not appear to have intermarried. Possibly one could argue that the difference is simply that undisputed Chhetris went through the same conversion process earlier.

- David Mason

Dear David,

I read your comment and you make some valid arguements, however, the article, which I wrote, clearly states that the original Gurkhas/Gorkhas are descended from the Rajputs, in Nepal they are called Thakuri, to which the present Royal family (my cousins) and the Ranas (my mother's family) belong. Not all Gurkhas are Thakuri, because then others came into the fold of becoming followers of Guru Gorkhanath and filling the ranks of the Gorkha army. You are right, Brahmins did not intermarry freely with others but they did which will come to my point about Chettri, they are very orthodox. The "clean caste" do eat pork, but not domestic pork, instead we eat wild boar, which I do believe is also considered pork. Chettris are below Thakur and are considered to be Thakuri who have mixed blood with other "clean castes" and that could be a Thakuri/Brahmin mix.

Cheers,

Gorkhali 05:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Dear Gorkhali,

I think we are in agreement that "Gurkha" as the word is used by the British includes janjati soldiers, either those in the armies of Prithvi Narayan and his successors, or those the British recruited. If you are using this word in a stricter Nepali sense, I suppose you might exclude janjatis who are not "twice-born", or you might include them if they fought for Prithvi Narayan and his successors, but not if they fought for the British.

This may be a off-thread, but does the Royal family acknowledge Khas ancestors from the far west (Karnali-Bheri) in ancient times as well as Rajputs who must have arrived in Nepal later after their homeland in northern India was invaded? And does the Royal family tree possibly even include Kham ancestors from ancient times?

I was interested in Kham people I met in Pyuthan and Rolpa because they were very conscious of having their own history that isn't part of the country's "official" history. Part of this is that "Magars" in the Chaubisi Rajya region are descended from Kham who came from the eastern part of the Baisi Rajya. It also seems that Chhetris in the Chaubisi came from Khas moving east from the Baisi Rajya as well as fresh infusions of Rajputs fleeing India.

So if Khas and Kham were moving east from the Baisi Rajya at the same time, were they rivals or allies? Prithvi Narayan clearly depended on "Magar" soldiers, just as they benefitted from him by getting modern weapons and learning modern tactics. So did P.N. begin this alliance from nothing, or did it actually have a long history going back hundreds of years? And if it was more ancient, were there even Kham-Khas marriages, perhaps in the form of subsidiary wives or concubines?

- David 76.80.9.100 19:58, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

learn to quote (or learn english?)
Bravest of the brave, most generous of the generous, never had _A_ country more faithful friends than you

--84.159.137.29 17:50, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Now you are making a mountain of a molehill. Theres no need to be rude. Its evident that the most of the authors of this article are not native speakers of English. Try to be helpful.

अमेय आरयन AMbroodEY 11:07, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I am so so sorry that my English is not up to your standards. Can you ever forgive me? I simply took that quote which was further down the article and pasted it closer to the top, maybe I should have been more careful and noticed the "A" missing. I will try to take a remedial course in english 84.159.137.29, thank you for being so kind and understanding. Gorkhali 10:16, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * So, ignoring people's levels of fluency in English, is the quote correct with the "a" or without it? I don't live in London so I can't check what is engraved on the plaque but I have seen both versions on the web (even on the BBC website). Cjrother 23:45, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

The quote does not include an A. The above commentary is unnecessary and was plain rude and racist, hich also shows a lack of common sense in "Maybe you should have also checked instead of flaunting your mastery of the English language".

The quote goes as this:

“As I write these last words, my thoughts return to you who were my comrades, the stubborn and indomitable peasants of Nepal. Once more I hear the laughter with which you greeted every hardship. Once more I see you in your bivouacs or about your fires, on forced march or in the trenches, now shivering with wet and cold, now scorched by a pitiless and burning sun. Uncomplaining you endure hunger and thirst and wounds; and at the last your unwavering lines disappear into the smoke and wrath of battle. Bravest of the brave, most generous of the generous, never had country more faithful friends than you".

The words of Professor Sir Ralph Turner, MC, who served with the 3rd Queen Alexandra's Own Gurkha Rifles in the First World War

Gorkhali 18:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

As a native speaker of English and a linguistics major and someone who understands not only frustration with learning new languages but also the often restrictive nature of available quotable resources, I am embarrassed that this racist topic has been raised. All non-native speakers of English, I apologize for this.

VolpeArgenta

Please tell me what is so racist about commenting on someones English? --Michaelphillipr (talk) 10:49, 11 November 2009 (UTC)


 * There was probably no racist intent meant but when commenting on Wikipedia one needs to bear in mind that for many of the contributors English is not their first language, in addition, many editors are from countries where learning English requires a considerable effort on their part, so making allowances for the sometimes difficult circumstances that some contributors face is often in order.


 * Generally it is best to show good manners, and assume that the contributor is doing their best. Stating "learn to quote (or learn english?)" is not very helpful when for all you know, the contributor may well be doing his or her very best to do just that. Not everyone has the benefit of a state education in English from the age of five years old - some have to start learning English much later in life.


 * BTW, the CORRECT capitalisation for the heading would have been; "Learn to quote (or learn English?)" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.147.13 (talk) 11:15, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Post independence, percentage confusion
Would you clarify this text; I find it hard to understand:
 * Unfortunately, India's per capita income is 100% less than British per capita income, which means the Gurkha must return to Nepal and receive only one/hundreth part of what he would have received had that clause not been there.

100% less than something is zero, and India's per capita income is not zero. Do you mean to say it's 1% of Britain's? Or 10%? And why and how must the Gurkha return to Nepal because of this income inequality?

Momander 19:13, 10 March 2006 (UTC)


 * For most of the history of the British Army's Gurkha regiments it was traditional and customary for the retired Gurkha soldier to return back to his home village in Nepal, where his British Army pension allowed him to live in relative comfort compared to others in his village, the cost of living there being but a fraction of what it would be for a comparable soldier in the UK. This is why Gurhka soldier's pensions were less than for other British Army personnel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.173.13 (talk) 16:11, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

The statue picture
I've added the picture of statue and the inscription. Not sure where to put it... It took me 2 solid hrs to locate the statue in Westminster!! अमेय आर्यन DaBroodey 19:32, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
 * For anyone else who needs to find it, just go to Whitehall and ask one of the policemen on guard at Downing Street as it is only two minutes walk from there (opposite the public enterance to the Ministry of Defence). In the last decade or so lots of memorials and statues to World War II have been errected on three sides of the MOD building, so if you are interested in the subject there are a lot to see there, including a statue of Bill Slim and a memorial to the Chindits --Philip Baird Shearer 11:31, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

British Army Gurkhas Picture
The picture with the following caption:

“British Gurkhas guarding the Coalition Provisional Authority compound in Baghdad during the occupation of Iraq (Operation TELIC)”

The Nepalese people in the picture are wearing uniforms of a private security company called “Global Security”. They are security guards employed by a PMC under contract with the US State Department in Iraq, they are not active service “British Gurkhas” (like many Gurkhas they may be former British Gurkhas).

I don’t know much about wikipedia so I am unsure what should be done to correct the photo so I didn’t make any changes

JITW 07:53, 3 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Agreed - that picture is nothing short of a disgrace...poncing around in cowboy hats and polyester fatigues. "Royal" British Army indeed - get rid of iiiiiiiit!

Numbers don't match cited reference?
The numbers of battalions don't add up. 8+2+40 <> 55. Also, the cited article speaks about 112,000 Nepalese Gurkhas, and the Wikipedia article was edited to say 250,000. Can someone find a more precise figure, or is this just merely inflationary claims? Please, cite sources to back these figures. --Petercorless 13:02, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

The problem with references
I can understand the insistence on references in a general way, but when it comes to Nepalese history and culture, a lot of what people are writing for Wikipedia is actually cutting edge. Instead of published sources they are often drawing on oral sources, on personal observation, and sometimes on Nepali language sources which would not be useful to cite in English because most readers could not use them.

Another problem is that proficiency in English that would support writing credible articles is a recent phenomenon in Nepal, so knowledge is making its way from Nepali and other local languages into English for the first time.

There is still a great shortage of material on Nepal, especially in geography, most languages and anthropology. It would be much more productive to focus on filling in blank spots than to obsess over references.

- Debbahadur (David Mason) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.80.26.121 (talk) 20:58, 16 March 2007 (UTC).

Wrong redirect
Gorkha redirects to Gurkha. However, Gorkha isnt mainly the name for soldiers or the people from Gorkha. It is:


 * The name of todays nepalese CITY Gorkha
 * The name of the medieval STATE of Gorkha
 * Nepals official name as a state up to 1930
 * The name of todays DISTRICT of Gorkha

I was redirected from a page which in fact was about the CITY of Gorkha (about which there is not a separate article yet, but as it is a district headquarter and a main tourist goal with a number of important historical monuments, there should be, soner or later.)

Togrim, user of the Norwegian Wikipedia, 2007-04-01 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.48.140.40 (talk) 01:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC).

Awards
I changed "won" to "received" in regards to several awards, in that it isn't the lottery, it's a citation for bravery. Similar to the American Medal of Honor, one "receives" it and is a "recipient", rather than one "winning" it and being a "winner".

Actually, that isn't true. It is a bit of an old way of saying it, to be sure, but won is perfectly acceptable as a verb in that sense. Its not about "winning" as in beating other people, it is "won" as in performing exceptionally to receive something.

Which century?
Gorakshanath states he was "an 11th to 12th century Nath yogi." This article says 8th. --Chriswaterguy talk 02:22, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

There has been a long debate over the exact dating of Gorkhanath. For example, the Sikhs claim that their first Guru, Guru Nanak, had met Guru Gorakhnath. Thus we had to go with what is stated in Gorkha history and the annals of Mewar. Gorkhali (talk) 20:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Understandable - but the debate should be reported (however briefly). Cool article btw. --Chriswaterguy talk 03:38, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Warrior Saint
Gorakshanath was probably born in a low caste family in Punjab or lived there for a long time. He was a nath yogi and he never carried Arms. He was a Hindu nath Yogi who founded a sect and devised new yoga techniques such as 'Hath Yoga'. He did travel widely, but his life details are really obscure. This article is making a fool of him.

And Mr. Bappa Rawal is perhaps missing from history books of India. I mean one who defeated Islamic Armies, conquered Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq is greater than Prithviraj Chauhan, the Mauryas, the Cholas etc. Maybe he even landed on the Moon.

Bappa meeting Gorakshanath is chronogically impossible. Bappa's initiation was performed by 'Pasupati' and he bore his ear lobes in the tradition of Nath Yogis established by Gorakshanath. Upon initiation, Bappa assumed the title of 'Rawal'. Hence the name, Bappa Rawal.

The Rawals were an eigth century clan absorbed into Nath parampara. Over centuries they have become transformed into a Muslim Sub-Order based in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Rawals are also based in Arunachal Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh and Hariyana. - Yogendra

It is sad that you simply jump to conclusions without attempting to look into the fact that Bappa Rawl is quite famous in Rajput history. The Rawals you are referring to have no relation with Bappa Rawal who is believed to be the founder of the Udaipur Royal family as well, which is clearly stated on the officail website for the Royal family of Udaipur.

Just because you haven't read about it, does not mean it does not exist in history books. A book you can look into is "History of Mewar" by Lt. Col. A F Pinhey, British Resident in Mewar from 1900-1906, published by Book Treasure Jodhpur, first published 1909, first reprint 1996. Rs 300.

And to be sarcastic does not strengthen your arguement either.

Gorkhali (talk) 06:03, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Article Needs Major Reworking for Facts and Neutral Point of View (added template banners at top of article)
This article is not up to standards of objectivity and coherence.

The first general problem is the facts: what exactly is a Gurkha?

We get three distinct concepts blended together:


 * Legendary religious foundations of an upper class Gurkha group in Rajastan (presented as history)


 * Upper class group in Nepal calling itself "Gurkhas" in some way which overlaps with other ethnic, caste, and royal-clan identities


 * The majority of the soldiers serving "as Gurkhas" in British and other armies — who seem to come mostly from ethnically Tibetan and lower-to-middle caste groups in Nepal (not ethnically Indo-Aryan upper caste Rajastan Rajputs)

So what exactly does being a "Gurkha" mean in the Himalayan region? Is it any Nepali who serves in a foreign army? Is it any Nepali descended from a man who served in British Gurkha regiments? Is it a religious designation — a variety of Nepali ethnic groups who participate in the Guru Gorkhanath tradition of Hinduism? If there are ethnic Tibetans involved are they all even (strictly) Hindus rather than (syncretic) Buddhists?

For example, there is the "Gorkha" autonomy movement in Darjeeling — where the "Gorkhas" are a poor and marginalized native people fighting for social and economic rights. That doesn't sound anything like being members of the Nepal royal family. It doesn't sound like people with a British Army pension. And the majority of ethnic groups of the area seems to be Tibetan and Buddhist.

Further, some perusing at ethnologue.org shows the term "Gorkha" being used exclusively for speakers of Tibetan languages:

http://www.ethnologue.com/14/show_language.asp?code=TGE

So it's looking like there are two completely distinct groups involved here:


 * native ethnic Tibetans in a district of Nepal called Gorkha (which may or may not be derived from the name of the Guru Gorkhanath figure),


 * and the Nepali ruling class which, separately, and possibly even coincidentally, uses the "Gorkha" name for itself in reference to (legendary) descent from the Guru Gorkhanath figure.

If so, then the question is, how did they interrelate prior to the British presence in the Subcontinent, and during the British campaign to recruit mercenary fighters? Was the Gorkha ethnic group the traditional foot soldiers for the Nepali monarchy? And who serves as Gurkha abroad today — is there still a division between upper caste Indo-Aryan officers and ethnic Tibetan troops?


 * The nepali monarchy is now defunct, as they had wiped themselves out. The Gurkhas are still here. 86.174.236.163 (talk) 01:37, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

The second general problem with the article is its very obvious lack of objectivity. In addition to blurring religious legend with history, it gives a very biased description of Nepal history with statements like "the darkest period of Nepalese history (104 years of dictatorial rule)".

The third general problem is the writing style, which is not always in "encyclopedia voice" and goes off on inappropriately elaborate tangents (generally trying to assure us of some advocatory opinion). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.36.149.155 (talk) 07:05, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Operation Peace of the Galilee
I have moved this text

To here because either there are no obvious sources on the net or it is a copyvio of www.faulkingtruth.com/Articles/CommentaryToo/1064.html by Down the Middle (Don't follow the link see Spam blacklist). If the incident is to be on this page then we need another source that includes which Gorkha regiment these Gorkhas were from etc. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 22:05, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

News
Some Gurhka news -. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:50, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

More news on 29 Apr 09 - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8023882.stm. This seems to require an edit to section 6.3 Treatment of Gurkhas in the United Kingdom. 68.13.125.163 (talk) 18:57, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Indo-Aryan?
On the Indo-Aryan peoples page they are classed as being Indo-Aryan but there is no reference for this here --Maurice45 (talk) 15:08, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Then we need to find a way to incorporate that.

Gorkhali (talk) 08:37, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

They are not Indo-Aryan; they are Mongoloids. I notice in the UK, Mongoloid Gurkha and Indo-Aryan Nepalese in the nursing or care-working professions do not mix or talk to each other. 86.174.236.163 (talk) 01:20, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

First day motion
"the first, first day motion defeat for a government since 1978". First day motion? What's one of those? Bagunceiro (talk) 09:17, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

They are actually called an early day motions it is a debate that can be brought to the house of commons by any memember of the house. This particular one was on 'opposition amendment day' one of the few times (only 20 per year) opposition parties may table a motion or ammendment to laws. It is rare that an early day motion goes to a debate and it is vertualy unheard of that the government loses the vote on one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.162.123 (talk) 18:52, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

History Gap
The History ends in 1947? All it does is say they were moved to Malaya on the Independance of India. What then? Further down it mentions Hong Kong and the large Gurkha population but not how they got their. Perphaps some mention of the Gurkha Brigade being moved to Hong Kong from (presumably) Malaya and when Hong Kong became part of China the Brigade became based in Britain (which is where the controversy stems from). Before 1997 Gurkhas could settle in Hong Kong when they retired, after 1997 they couldnt as it became part of China, instead they could settle in Britain as this was were the Brigade was moved but (for some bizare reason) they decided not to let any Gurkha who was already in the British Army at this point retire in Britain, only those who joined after 1997. The article is very good but this clarification would be nice (though perphaps not in the confusing way i put it!)Willski72 (talk) 11:14, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Nonsense. There are many Gurkha and their descendents who are settled in Hong Kong post 1997, as citizens of HK, and therefore of China. All that's required is birth in HK or 7-years of HK residency. I went through HK Immigration a few years ago and the immigration officer who stamped my passport was a Gurkha (going by his name tag and looks) who spoke to me in an "Indian"-accented English. 86.174.236.163 (talk) 01:25, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Joanna Lumley
Could we find somewhere to mention Joanna Lumley on this page? I have no doubt that she will be remembered as a hero amongst Gurkhas, from this day forth (see link). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazy Eddy (talk • contribs) 13:38, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Agreed. Matt (talk) 13:45, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Recent edit
Can I ask why a lot of my edits have been reverted in the most recent change? Most of what I had done was MOS work, i.e. WP:NAMEDREFS, adding citations and formatting the Further reading section so that it was sorted alphabetically. These were constructive edits. To label the changes reverting them as vandalism is, in my opinion, greatly offensive. The same goes for the citation needed tags that I added, which have now been removed without adding the citations asked for. My aim was to try to get this article up to at least a B class. That can't occur without the citations where I added the tags. Given that I didn't have the sources for these, I added the tags to see if others did.

I understand that there are legimate vandalism reverts on this page, but to have my work lumped in with this is personnally an insult.

Other things were also reverted, i.e. the wikilink on the image for Rambahadur Limbu. Captain Seafort added the correct wikilink to the individual in the caption and yet this has been reverted to a disambig page. This is wrong and is another example of reverting a constructive edit.

I might remind contributors that no one editor 'owns' an article on wikipedia and that unless it is clearly vandalism (i.e. the addition of offensive language, swear words, blanking the page, etc.) care should be taken not to revert edits that are legimate and constructive.

Can I ask whether there is any point in me contributing to this article anymore, or is it just going to get reverted? — AustralianRupert (talk) 21:56, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Edit War
Two users appear to be in an edit war over the SEE ALSO section, this section should only include articles not already in the text. Instead of deleting each others edits, why not work together and incude the see also section into the text of the article. --Jim Sweeney (talk) 09:53, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

yea, we should work together but adding religion section which doesnt refrence anything about gurkhas and other unnecessary things is just wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MongolGurkha (talk • contribs) 16:16, 6 November 2009 (UTC)


 * How about a heading GURKHA RELIGION with references ?--Jim Sweeney (talk) 16:50, 6 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I think that will do--MongolGurkha (talk) 20:32, 6 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree with Jim that the see also section needs to be limited and the best solution for this would seem to be incorporating the links in the body of the text. — AustralianRupert (talk) 22:22, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree and was glad that Jim cleared up my understanding of the See Also section. There is an article already called Religion in Nepal which may be of interest to religion among Gurkhas.

Gorkhali (talk) 23:38, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Also, to add one more thing, MongolGurkha needs to refrain from adding personal insults from his edits.

Gorkhali (talk) 23:40, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

gorkhas and gurkhas
for the sake of clarity this article should be renamed "gorkha" and written about the nepali ethnic tribe only. if you look into the disambiguation page, all articles relating to the gorkha people and political units are spelled with an "o". there is an article about the municipality of gorkha under the former name of Prithbinarayan. it would be nice, if someone could change the title into "gorkha (municipality)". in nepali the spelling and pronunciation also is with and "o". on the other hand, the article "gurkha" should be about the military units only. b. t.w., there is no official spelling "ghurka".--Sundar1 (talk) 11:54, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

The Gurkha Soldiers marvelous Maybe some photos of their hoemeland?
Maybe some photos of the area where Gurkhas live?GAHADRAMATINIHENRY (talk) 22:00, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism
There appears to be a lot of what could be classed as vandalism with this article at the moment. Any unexplained edits will always come under scrutiny and be reverted if identified as vandalism. Editors trying to improve the article need to add an edit summary. --Jim Sweeney (talk) 14:57, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Jim, I try to mention vandalism if it seems so, otherwise I have noticed a lot of "pro-Maoist" editing against the history section.

Gorkhali (talk) 14:20, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't know enough about the subject to question this edit you have just reverted    but make sure (like you did) you always fill in the edit summery so others cannot claim it as vandalism. --Jim Sweeney (talk) 14:26, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protected for two weeks: vandalism / slow edit-warring by IP editor. Roger Davies talk 21:52, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

It seems they won't stop at it. Not sure what to do at this point. Should I go ahead and revert the article once again? Gorkhali (talk) 17:52, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

N regiments (2N battalions)
Is it really necessary to mention the number of battalions per regiment every bloody time? It just sounds comical in parts, and distracts from the substance of the article. --70.194.66.102 (talk) 23:45, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Kabul Embassy Security Force
They are also the main guard force for the US Embassy in Kabul. They are contracted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.21.47.186 (talk) 06:32, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Nepalese are Gurkha.
Gurkha(Gorkha) is Nepalese Demonym. Gurkha are indigenous people mainly from whole Nepal and whole Nepalese people and Gurkhas are not indigenous people of eastern India there are some Nepali residents people emigrants from Nepal. So please change wikipedia page of Gurkha are indigenous people mainly from eastern India, mid-western and eastern Nepal. Gurkha form whole Nepal not only mid-western and eastern Nepal. All Nepalese people people pride to be a Gorkhas and the their bravery. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.28.84.27 (talk) 04:47, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Not all Nepalese are Gurkhas (the soldiers we are familiar with). In terms of races, today's territory known as Nepal is inhabited by two races, the Mongoloid Gurkhas (whose phenotypical features overlap with the Chinese peoples, and whose spoken language belong to the Sino_Tibetan language group) and the Indic peoples whose features overlap with peoples in India, and whose spoken language is Indic. The two groups do not mix generally, even when they are abroad. 86.174.236.163 (talk) 01:33, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Motto of Gurkha
कांथर हुनु भन्दा मर्नु राम्रो "Kaatar Hunnu Bhanda Marnu Ramro" (Nepali) "Better to die than to be a coward"

जुन ब्यक्तिले भन्छ कि मलाई मर्नुबाट डर लाग्दैन, उ ब्यक्ति कि त झुटो बोल्दैछ कि त गोर्खा हो।" "Jun Byakti le Bhanchha ki Malai Marnu Bata Dar Lagdaina, U Byakti ki ta Jhuto Boldaichha ki ta Gorkha Ho." (Nepali) "If a man says he is not afraid of dying, he is either lying or is a Gurkha."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.28.84.27 (talk) 06:10, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Nickname
The Gurkhas / The Bravest of the Brave — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.28.84.27 (talk) 06:12, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Gurkha from whole Nepal
Gorkha from whole Nepal. Today Gorkha lives in whole Nepal. not only mid-western and eastern nepal. Gorkha district lies in western Nepal which is the homeland of Gurkha and ethinic Rai, Limbu from eastern Nepal and ethnic Gurung, Magars, Chhetri from Mid Nepal and western Nepal. So Gurkha from whole Nepal significantly communities in India who are the emigrants from Nepal called Indian Gorkha and Nepali Indian. Please change wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.244.214.255 (talk) 09:21, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

history- Gallipoli
I'm certainly no expert on the Gurkha's but I have detailed expertise on the Gallipoli campaign and I have to say that there are deeply fundamental errors in this content that quite frankly put the reliability of the whole page into question.

'''During the ultimately unsuccessful Gallipoli campaign in 1915, the Gurkhas were among the first to arrive and the last to leave. The 1st/6th Gurkhas, having landed at Cape Helles, led the assault during the first major operation to take out a Turkish high point, and in doing so captured a feature that later became known as "Gurkha Bluff".[21] At Sari Bair they were the only troops in the whole campaign to reach and hold the crest line and look down on the Straits, which was the ultimate objective.[22] The 2nd Battalion of the 3rd Gurkha Rifles (2nd/3rd Gurkha Rifles) was involved in the conquest of Baghdad.'''

I fully understand that there is a desire on the part of the author to mythologise a passion he holds dear to his heart. But Wikipedia, I would expect, is not the forum for this. A more informative and neutral stance is far preferable to mythology.

The Gurkha were nowhere near the 'first to arrive' at any of the fighting zones at Gallipoli. That honour rests squarely with several other units (who happen to be Irish, New Zealand, English, Australian.). There are so many primary references to this I'm a little bit shocked that anyone could cite otherwise. Please refer to the various great War official histories.

At "Sari Bair" the Gurkha's held the Q ridge for several minutes before retiring under accidental barrage from British ships. Notably they also held the seaward side for those minutes( ensuring no view of the 'straits'). It was the New Zealand and British troops on the higher peak, Chunuk Bair, who held their ground for some days under intense Ottoman and mistaken British & Ottoman bombardment. They had clear views of the straits for some days and had to fight quite desperately in very isolated conditions. The New Zealanders were the absolute standouts in this regard and this is well documented. It is also well documented that the Gurkhas fell back in disarray after the first bombardment on Hill Q. There is also information from the official histories that indicate that Australian troops also sighted 'the straits' from 3rd ridge in earlier fighting. These well documented histories puts the claim of "the only troops in the whole campaign to reach and hold the crest line and look down on the Straits" squarely into the zone of indisputable mythology.

Please refer to any and all official histories for details: British Official History - military operations vol 1 & 2: Gallipoli. Aspinall-Oglander Official History of Australia in the War of 1914–1918. (vol 1 for ref to Australians views of the straits, vol 2 for detailed descriptions of the fighting on the heights in August).CEW BEAN

To say the Gurkhas were " the only troops in the whole campaign to reach and hold the crest line and look down on the straits, which was the ultimate objective" is a rather deliberate abuse of ANY of the historical facts that have been recorded. I am simply stunned that such an assertion could be made.

The references applied to these comments are "Parker 2005". Clearly our 'Parker' has no knowledge of the campaign and to cite him as an authority is a disaster. I am quite prepared to cite a multitude of Official History sources that put Parker back into his flawed sandbox. On a basis of this, any comment made in this article based on 'Parker 2005' as a reference must be very carefully reconsidered. The significance of this is that my particular small area of expertise brings into question the veracity of the whole article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xeroic (talk • contribs) 05:46, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 February 2014
'''Gurkha from Whole Nepal. Nepalese people are Gurkha Source :- http://www.ayo-gorkhali.org/ In Wikipedia page of Gurkha not given to source of the term Gurkha are indigenous people mainly from the mid-western, eastern Nepal and the Gorkhaland region of India. A term Gurkha are indigenous people of different clans from the whole Nepal not want to give source, all people of world know Gurkha from Whole Nepal not only mid western and eastern Nepal. Some sources are given below Gurkha from whole Nepal and Gurkha are Nepalese origin people.

http://www.photius.com/countries/nepal/national_security/nepal_national_security_origins_of_the_legen~10146.html

http://www.gwt.org.uk/about-gurkhas/what-are-gurkhas/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10782099

http://www.himalayan-imports.com/gurkha.html

https://www.army.mod.uk/gurkhas/27856.aspx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.244.219.161 (talk) 12:27, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

History of Gurkha detail see : http://www.tangting.org/latest-news/ttta-blog/30-the-history-of-the-gurkhas

Many sources give information about Gurkha, Gurkha who are Nepali origin people and Nepali origin people stay in whole Nepal. So please change in Wikipedia page, Gurkha are indigenous people of different clans from the whole Nepal not only mid western and eastern Nepal or Gorkhaland region of India. All Gurkha are Nepali origin people. History of Gurkha is related to South Asian country Nepal. British and Indian Army Gurkha troops recruited from South Asian country of Nepal's Nepali origin people. Nepali origin also known as Gurkha. So Gurkha is not related to other countries. Gurkha related country is Only Nepal. 49.244.199.114 (talk) 11:13, 17 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Page is no longer semi-protected Kap 7 (talk) 02:42, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Padlock-silver-open.svg Not done: According to the page's protection level and your user rights, you should currently be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (t • e • c) 02:46, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Mutiny?
"Three days after the mutiny began ...." That there was action is not in question. Someone called it mutiny? Ok. Let them describe the facts that lead to that conclusion. Or, alternatively, use language that either does not lead to that conclusion or language that presents this as an interpretation. Perhaps a popular interpretation. Perhaps an important interpretation. Perhaps a true depiction. Or, otherwise, straight out show / substantiate that it was mutiny. Simplest, nae? --BenTremblay (talk) 06:17, 24 February 2014 (UTC)


 * The troops involved were soldiers who had voluntarily joined the region's military forces and who had sworn an oath of loyalty to The Crown. By going against lawful orders they were automatically de jure mutineers.


 * If there had only been civilians involved it would have been a rebellion. The fact that soldiers - who had previously agreed when they signed up to obey lawful orders from their superiors - were involved, and that they had organised themselves to wilfully disobey these orders, automatically made it a mutiny.


 * The latter is regarded as a more serous offence in law because for a soldier, sailor, or airman, etc., the owing of allegiance and loyalty is explicit in that he/she has explicitly (and voluntarily) sworn allegiance at some point, whereas for the civilian it is implicit, being assumed ('implied') to be owed as a part of normal citizenship. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.173.109 (talk) 08:55, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

RELIGION (GURUNG)
Gurung religion is Ancient Bo`n (BON,BONISM)so admin guys you have to make about our religion is Bon so all history make Gurung religion is BON thats all you see the website www.tamu-pyelhu.org. Now some gurung people goes to Christian/Buddha and others. Gurung is very rich for culturally and own tradition. Gurung Dharma its call Bon and our priest is pachyu, Klehpri and Bonpo lam these are our priest.

thanks

kind regards

(Top Bahadur Gurung) top pahchyu tamu''' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.241.173.4 (talk) 16:02, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Protection
Regarding the article on most ancient civilized Social groups of Asia, this article need to be fully protected so that only only wiki admin from united states can edit this. (Manzildrewpoudar (talk) 12:17, 12 May 2014 (UTC))

Obvious commercial External links There are some links under External links that goes straight to webpages offering merchandise and services for sale, perhaps someone can verify this and remove if you reach the same conclusion. 83.249.180.1 (talk) 13:08, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 16:51, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

suggestion
it would be kind to state the present numeric strength. thanks. pietro.151.29.156.15 (talk) 06:32, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gurkha. 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/20110525075456/http://prideofindia.net/param.html to http://www.prideofindia.net/param.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040529161508/http://www.army.mod.uk/brigade_of_gurkhas/gurkha_employment/tpa/ to http://www.army.mod.uk/brigade_of_gurkhas/gurkha_employment/tpa

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:53, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gurkha. 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/20111017000403/http://asianhistory.about.com/od/glossaryfj/g/GlosGurkha.htm to http://asianhistory.about.com/od/glossaryfj/g/GlosGurkha.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:23, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Gurkha. 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/20090205193507/http://army.mod.uk/gurkhas/7561.aspx to http://www.army.mod.uk/gurkhas/7561.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061208165044/http://www.cualann-scottish-books.co.uk/books/hebgurkha.htm to http://www.cualann-scottish-books.co.uk/books/hebgurkha.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061208164541/http://www.cualann-scottish-books.co.uk/books/ghigh.htm to http://www.cualann-scottish-books.co.uk/books/ghigh.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070801202220/http://www.cualann-scottish-books.co.uk/books/greiver.htm to http://www.cualann-scottish-books.co.uk/books/greiver.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040805213553/http://www.nepalesekhukuri.com/vcs.html to http://www.nepalesekhukuri.com/vcs.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121230172355/http://www.lionheartedboys.com/ to http://www.lionheartedboys.com/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:11, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Myanmar Born Gorkha
Please add some airtical about *Myanmr Born Gorkha* Sonuwgl125 (talk) 05:46, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Suggested changes
moved down and titled. Originally posted by, whom I would ask to SIGN their posts please -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 13:33, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Please see the article for more authentic information on who makes the British recruits of Gurkha. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10782099

The ranks have always been dominated by four ethnic groups, the Gurungs and Magars from central Nepal, the Rais and Limbus from the east, who live in villages of impoverished hill farmers. ( But no mention of these. It has conveniently replaced the two with others who are/ were rare in the British army recruits ).

After suffering heavy casualties in the invasion of Nepal, the British East India Company signed a hasty peace deal in 1815, which also allowed it to recruit from the ranks of the former enemy.

Following the partition of India in 1947, an agreement between Nepal, India and Britain meant four Gurkha regiments from the Indian army were transferred to the British Army, eventually becoming the Gurkha Brigade
 * How do I make the amendment or sign the post pls?
 * Thanks Doasdoo (talk) 13:57, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
 * You just signed here (four tildes ~ ), good enough for now... just remember to always sign on talk pages. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 15:46, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 November 2018
Please Change " Ethnically, Gurung, Magar and Kshetri (Chettri) or Khas, Thakuri mainly were the Gorkha tribes that united the erstwhile Gorkha Kingdom and fought against the British invasions. Today, Gorkha soldiers mostly belong to the Gurung, Magar, Thakuri and Khas. There are Gurkha military units in the Nepalese, British and Indian armies enlisted in Nepal, United Kingdom and India.

To

Ethnically, Gurung, Magar, Kshetriya, Thakuri, Kiranti (Rai people, Limbu, Sunuwar) mainly were the Gorkhali tribes that united the erstwhile Gorkha Kingdom and fought against the British invasions. Today, Gorkhali soldiers belong to the Gurung, Magar, Kiranti (Rai people, Limbu, Sunuwar), Tamang, Newar, Sherpa, Bahun, Chhetri, Thakuri and various ethnic groups in Nepal. There are Gurkha military units in the Nepalese, British and Indian armies enlisted in Nepal, United Kingdom and India. RRRoyal88 (talk) 09:35, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.--B dash (talk) 06:27, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 June 2019
Please change "From the end of the Indian Rebellion of 1857 until the start of World War I, the Gurkha Regiments saw active service in Burma, Afghanistan, the North-East Frontier and the North-West Frontiers of India, Malta (the Russo-Turkish War, 1877–78), Cyprus, Malaya, China (the Boxer Rebellion of 1900) and Tibet (Younghusband's Expedition of 1905)."

to

"After the Indian mutiny of 1857-58, the British authorities in India feared the inclusion of Hindu castes in the army. They discouraged the Brahminical influence in the military as they considered the Hindu castes more susceptible to Brahminical values. As a result, they discouraged the inclusion of Thakuri and Khas groups in the Gorkha units and refused to recruit tribes other than Gurungs and Magars in the Gorkha units. They also pressurized Prime Minister Bir Shamsher Jang Bahadur Rana to include at least of 75% of the forces of Gurungs and Magars."


 * 27.34.68.198 (talk) 14:57, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Pending-protection-unlocked.svg Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. NiciVampireHeart 09:44, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Recent "cleanup" edits

 * because I can see that you will be happy to just edit-war over this, here's the breakdown:
 * replacing AND linking "AD": don't replace "CE" if that's what the article uses, don't repeatedly wikilink the same term (overlinking)
 * no need to add "United Kingdom" if London is already linked
 * removal of salient information - these are British Indian soldiers, belongs in caption
 * replacing "South Asia of Nepalese descent" with plain "Nepal": no. See at least three discussions on this talk page - Gurkhas do/did not have to be citizens of Nepal, merely of Nepalese descent
 * multiple instances of superfluous plural piping - like "Nepalis|Nepali"; capitalization piping - like "Anglo-Nepalese War|Anglo-Nepalese war"; and superfluous piping in general - "Gorkha Kingdom|the Gorkha Kingdom". None of these are necessary OR desired.

I'm agnostic on moving up the section on the Victoria cross, but when there's one neutral edit embedded in a dozen undesirable ones, I'm going to revert the lot rather than picking through the pile to manually undo the damage one by one. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 21:53, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Please don't try to edit-war about this; I have no compunction about reporting you. Read WP:BRD, and then engage here. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 21:58, 4 March 2021 (UTC)


 * --- Hi user @, your recent reverts in different Wikipedia articles have been deemed unfit or controversial, Please read WP:STATUSQUO, WP:AGF. Reverting is appropriate mostly for vandalism or other disruptive edits. The Wikipedia edit warring policy forbids repetitive reverting. If you see a good-faith edit which you believe lowers the quality of the article, make a good-faith effort to reword instead of just reverting it.


 * Also, I tried to talk to you personally on your talk page, but you instead deleted all of the message when I addressed the situation on the talkpage, I assume it's just something that you want to hide and you know you are at the fault.


 * Please do not abuse or misuse revert as you are seen to be doing. Thank you.


 * As for the points you mentioned :


 * If you personally think that I am "overlinking" then you can manually unlink the wikilinks instead of reverting good-faith edits, as per WP:STATUSQUO, WP:AGF, since there are many good-faith edits done in the same single edit.
 * London could also refer to London, Ontario so stating the United Kingdom from the readers' perspective seems to be a good approach in this situation.
 * You mentioned that "these are British Indian soldiers, belongs in caption", please go to the image file itself, it clearly states "Nepalese national soldiers photographed on 1885 AD by Gustav Le Bon (died 1931)" even the file name is "Nepali soldiers Le Bon 1885.jpg". There is no mention of India what so ever.
 * "Anglo-Nepalese War", "Gorkha Kingdom" and "Nepali" are all nouns and should therefore be capitalized. I prefer Wikipedia to be as grammatically accurate a possible for the sake of readers. And you stating "None of these are necessary OR desired" is simply your personal opinion.
 * And you said, "but when there's one neutral edit embedded in a dozen undesirable ones, I'm going to revert the lot rather than picking through the pile to manually undo the damage one by one." Again I suggest you read WP:STATUSQUO, WP:AGF.
 * The Wikipedia policies and Wikipedia:Consensus are in place for everyone to be fair and not for you to ignore or cherry-pick the policies just because "rather than picking through the pile to manually undo the damage one by one" is easier. --- AWikiGenius (talk) 22:57, 4 March 2021 (UTC)