Talk:Rana dynasty/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

This family played a large role in Nepalese history and it would nice to have a bigger article on it. I personally don't know enought to do such an expansion but hopefully someone else does. Horses In The Sky ^{talk contributions}

What was Jang Bahadur's original name?

"Rana" is an honorific they took on at some point, probably once they were firmly in control in Nepal. What did they go by before that? 76.80.9.100 17:39, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Supposedly they went by Kunwar when they just ruled Kaski and Lamjung. Kunwar may only be another Rajput accolade. Before Kunwar, what?

Maybe it helps to realized that family names are mutable expedients. "If the shoe fits, wear it." Otherwise, buy a new shoe! LADave (talk) 00:05, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Bias

the article has a strong anti-rana bias in the initial part. plus, while india has meddled in nepal's politics, the insinuation that ranas were indian agents is too strong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ankurjain (talk • contribs) 16:10, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

The article does in highly biased. It does not mention lot of reforms carried out by the Rana family. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.101.207.132 (talk) 20:57, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I propose that the biographical stub Mohan Shamsher Jang Bahadur Rana be merged into this, in order to make a more complete single article. Jihg 00:48, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

• agree - it will make the article more complete!

Ankur Jain 12:45, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't the other Rana articles, namely those for Renaudip Singh Bahadur, Bir Shamsher Jang Bahadur Rana, and Chandra Shamsher Jang Bahadur Rana also merge here? Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 22:23, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't see why it hurts to have separate articles on especially noteworthy Ranas and just summarize the high points here. There were an awful lot of Ranas in government throughout the century plus when they ran the country! LADave (talk) 23:36, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Each rana is a individual and each need a separate article as history cannot be compressed in an article --Ashim nep (talk) 17:27, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Objections, POV Contention

I have strong objection against denigration of the Rana clan in Nepal. they were the original creators of modern Nepal. It was the Ranas who first signed peace treaty with the the East India Company and secured nepal's freedom from other contending powers.

Chronicles of this is evident in Diamond Shumshere's famous book "Seto Bagh", which has been translated into English by Greta Mary Rana. The imagery in the book gives ample food for thought for people who have been duped by Brahmin duplicity. The present republic status of Nepal has only served to destroy Nepal's image across the world.

The Ranas are mentioned in Burke's Peerage. Their contribution is somewhat biased in the book by American Political Scientist leo Rose and Bhuwan Lal Joshi. Also, references on the famous book, "Rise of the House of Gorkhas" by Fr. Ludwig Stiller, S.J. also appears to classify the Ranas as Prussian Junkers class. I vehemently oppose negative propaganda against the Rana family.

Das Scclagwort des Prachanda und ihr kommunister kohorte kann nicht zerstoeren uns. Die Elektorate in Nepalien sind Unbildungskeit und "naiieve". The history of military officers and administrators is totally unjustified. Danke schoen!

http://uqconnect.net/~zzhsoszy/states/nepal/nepal_rana.html

The above block of text was removed from this revision as made by User:Prittwitz791 at 03:24, November 20, 2008

--_EGGman⁶⁴ 10:51, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

The Ranas are controversial and for good reason. If Rana supporters want to weigh in with an alternative point of view and are prepared to reference it with reputable material published elsewhere, that's fine. However the point of view that the Ranas were despots who bled Nepal white and held the country back is the mainstream. Wikipedia needs to acknowledge this POV even if it makes some people unhappy. Wikipedia isn't a soapbox to be taken over by minority points of view.

For the sake of argument, let's say I think Richard Nixon was unjustly hounded out of office. That wouldn't entitle me to do a wholesale revision of everything about Watergate, the impeachment and resignation to support my POV. It would probably be OK to attempt to balance negative views of Nixon, provided that they aren't just a fringe opinion and I referenced legitimate material in support. LADave (talk) 23:58, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

What is "Rana dynasty" in Nepali?

The Shahs were the "Shaah(a) Raajba(n)sha", but would "Raajbansha" only be used with legitimate kings? Does it literally mean "King chair", i.e. "throne"? If so, would a different word used with the Ranas, since they didn't actually sit on the throne? LADave (talk) 23:42, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Genealogy

There used to be a few sentences about Rana's claiming descent from Rajputs somewhere in or near Rajasthan, and it has been dropped from this article. I think it belongs in the article. It needs to be backed up with citations, and alternative points of view that the genealogy was totally or partially fiction also needs to be covered, again with citations. Claims of Rajput descent have often used to legitimize traditional forms of rule in South Asia, and it certainly mattered during the century of Rana rule (and the de-facto Shah-Rana rule that followed).

Although the Rana family might not be happy with this kind of back-and-forth discussion, they obviously were public figures so they can't argue that their privacy rights outweigh the importance of their genealogy and its validity as a matter of historical significance. LADave (talk) 18:41, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Rana families current status and there lineage

I have cleared out all unnecessary rana lineage detail and there current status as it is irrelevant in this article .I suggest making another page if some one thinks its necessary for all of that crap.07:53, 28 February 2015 (UTC)AA (talk)