Talk:Nepalese royal massacre

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Nepal (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nepal, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Nepal-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. WikiProject icon
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Crime (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.


paras was not present in the royal family's get together and he didn't misbehave with any of the guest so the 2nd line is not satisfactory the site has no proof to say that dipendra killed his whole family maybe it is true but being a public site you cannot blame it on him without been proven guilty.

Conspiracy theory section's final sentences[edit]

Everywhere there is Controversy. But the Royal Family of Birendra was killed by Paras and his father. If Gyanendra and his family were safe and all other possible candidate for the throne were dead, then even a lay man can say that it was a tricky mind of Gyanendra to kill his elder brother and his family.

This probably shouldn't be there. Also the above discussion topic.... uh.. Cheeked (talk) 22:14, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

maybe someone killed them but without proof a respectable site like yours should not paste lines that blame on a person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:13, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

More conspiracy theories[edit]

Wikipedia is not a soapbox. It is not the point of Wikipedia to state conspiracy theories or other fringe opinions as a fact, let alone without references. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 19:59, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

how is this article not referenced to Mr. Tul Bahadur Shrechan[edit]

Mr. Tul Bahadur Shrechan had in 2009 called on the reports claimed that he along with other individuals had ploted for the event way back in 1975. Why.... is there no reference or metion of this in the article...? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Binaya.shrestha (talkcontribs) 15:04, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Cantsayit's comments[edit]

One hour later, Paras returned to the party armed with an H&K MP5 and an M16 and fired a single shot into the ceiling before turning the gun on his uncle, King Birendra. Seconds later, Paras shot one of his aunts. He then shot his uncle Dhirendra in the chest at point-blank range when he tried to stop Paras.[1].[1]

During the attack, Dipendra darted in and out of the room firing shots each time.

Something's confusing here... First this article is saying Paras drank heavily and then was doing the shooting, then it says Dipendra was firing shots. Wasn't it supposed to be Dipendra who did the killings?'s comment[edit]

The Victims of the massacre section is weird, also pretty hilarious Victims of the massacre

Many royal armies working inside and outside the Palace.These armies were not only the national army but also the innocent sons of our own citizens. [edit]Wounded Princess Shova, King Birendra's sister(the shooter didn't kill this alien in full consciousness.)The massacre was scary. This decision not to shoot this alien can't be taken in any drunken or drugged state of mind. Gorakh Shamsher, Princess Shruti's husband(the shooter didn't kill this alien in full consciousness.) Princess Komal, Prince (now former King) Gyanendra's wife and former Queen( the one who didnt shoot Shova and Shamsher will not shoot Komal, this decision of mind is not possible in any state of drunken or drugged mind.) (Princess) Ketaki Chester, King Birendra's cousin who had renounced her title( the name that is and was never heard during royal celebrations and news is appearing after the incident took place and this person is not affected at all in this scary massacre .) [[Paras, Crown Prince of Nepal|Prince Paras]He was not wounded .He is the son of the King and the future King so he has a full practice on these kinds of small things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:13, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

This article is an embarrassment to Wikipedia and the Nepalese people[edit]

A magic fairy did it, not Dipendra. Just ask the Nepali ultra-royalists who edit this ridiculous joke of an article.

It reads like a poorly-photocopied conspiracy tract somebody handed out on a Kathmandu street corner, and presents the Nepali people as ignorant 3rd world serfs who believe in the divine infallibility of monarchs. (talk) 00:07, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Please care to elaborate on the "ridiculous joke of an article" thing. And which part of the text makes it read like a "poorly-photocopied conspiracy tract". Please specify. Don't write texts on talk pages that read like conspiracy theories themselves. Shirsakbc (talk) 13:31, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Orchestration by the Chinese Government[edit]

The reference to the orchestration of this event by the Chinese government was added anonymously today by someone using the congress IP range. It references an article from I don't know if this is a credible news source. Any thoughts? It's a serious accusation to make without a credible source. Tenthrow (talk) 18:00, 23 July 2014 (UTC) should be considered reliable. According to Alexa,[1] it's ranked as the 20th most visited website in India, so we're not talking about some obscure fringe site. JohnValeron's stated reasoning for removal of the statement was that it didn't specifically mention Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist). However, the article did specifically mention Maoist rebels, and in Nepal that is who sources are generally referring to when they mention Maoists. (talk) 15:45, 4 August 2014 (UTC)