Talk:Gurkha

Semi-protected edit request on 9 December 2025

I request for where it says "Indian and Nepalese national soldiers" in the infobox to be changed to "Ethnic Nepalese soldiers", since all Gurkhas are of Nepalese descent, even the ones born and raised in India. ~2025-39485-09 (talk) 14:39, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: The article does not have an infobox. Presuming you are referring instead to the short description, you have not provided any sources to support your contention that "all Gurkhas are of Nepalese descent, even the ones born and raised in India." In any case, "Indian" refers to the country in whose military they serve and not to their ethnicity. Day Creature (talk) 16:26, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

See the talk page

@Northpixel: unregistered users with the same view as you have had their edit requests denied repeatedly for lack of reliable sources

Read what I say here before you revert again Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 02:06, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Ok, we've been warned for edit warring

@Northpixel: this is mandatory dispute resolution

"Your talk page still doesn’t explain why you reverted an already detailed article back to a less detailed, more confusing version. Could you please clarify the reason for this edit?"

For a start, I should have stated that it was the article talk page; that said, I do not believe that I made anything less detailed

This was the only content (excluding modifications to links and pre-existing sentences) you added that had not been reverted before my arrival: "The Gurkhas are widely recognized for their long history of military service and are known for their discipline, bravery, and loyalty. Gurkha soldiers have served in various national and international military forces, especially the British and Indian armies, and remain a symbol of courage in military history."

That is an unsourced statement in violation of MOS:PUFFERY, and now that I analysed it clearly, I do not see why it should remain. You are free to propose other measures, e.g. requests for comment or a discussion at the WikiProject level, but do read the denied edit requests above. Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 14:24, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

(Personal attack removed) Northpixel (talk) 17:40, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

@Northpixel: One, read WP:BRD. Do not insert your additions again until they have been discussed and agreed on here. You are currently edit-warring, and if it happens again, you will be reported. Two, if you ever kick off again as you did in the first few sentences of your reply above, you will be blocked without even a chance to squabble about it. Personal attacks are not tolerated, full stop.

Regarding the content, some of the material seems reasonable and might make good additions to the article. It is also generally not necessary to cite text in the lede, because it is supposed to be a summary of cited text in the main article body. However, that relies on such additions being an actual factual summary of body content, and the hagiography-style text you inserted is not this. Common knowledge has no bearing on anything and does not replace a citation. You are doing yourself no favours by being combative, stubborn, and rude here, while ignoring basic Wikipedia policies and requirements. Play nice or be prevented from playing. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 06:30, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

@Elmidae: they also blanked most of their talk page Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 06:37, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

No rule against that, and it is taken as evidence that they have seen whatever was on there. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 06:39, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

I know lol Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 06:43, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Lmao, those were just bot replies saying I added the wrong links. You really out here trying to get me banned lol. And next time, add “your sources” before deleting other people’s edits while saying “not reliable source.” Northpixel (talk) 08:10, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

@Northpixel: ah yes, bot replies, whatever these things are

You are also denying here that it is the adding user's responsibility to prove that the content they are adding is correctly sourced Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 09:00, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

I don't think I have to display your unnecessary comment on my talk page. Those comments were unnecessary and just made my profile look ugly. There were already more than enough bot comments on my talk page besides your unnecessary messages, so I deleted it. Don’t be upset about it. I simply didn’t care to keep your comment displayed on my profile. Northpixel (talk) 10:44, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Also, if you actually had real knowledge about the Gurkhas, you would’ve already replied to my other talk section where I clearly mentioned their past, origin, and present Haha. Northpixel (talk) 10:47, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Alright, let’s take this step by step.

This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

1. Revert the edit from “Monument of the Gurkha Soldier” back to "Gurkha Memorial," since it already has an established Wikipedia page.
2. There is no reason to remove the image of Prithvi Narayan Shah. He was the unifier of Nepal and the ruler whose army later became internationally known as the Gurkhas/Gorkhas/Gorkhalis. The image should be restored.
3. The term “Gorkha/Gurkha” itself originates from the Gorkha Kingdom in present-day central Nepal (modern-day Gandaki Province). This fact alone establishes the historical origin of the Gurkhas as native to Nepal.
4. During the Unification of Nepal campaigns led by the King of Gorkha, Prithvi Narayan Shah. Nepal expanded from Kangra in the west (modern-day Himachal Pradesh, India) to the Teesta River in the east (modern-day Rangpur Division, Bangladesh). Over time, people from Nepal migrated into nearby Himalayan regions, particularly present-day Indian states like Sikkim, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, and West Bengal. Their descendants are today recognized as Nepali-speaking Indian citizens, and they are the only Indian citizens allowed to join the Indian Gorkha regiments. Aside from them, a significant number of Gorkha soldiers in the Indian Army have historically been recruited directly from Nepal, although recruitment from Nepal has been temporarily suspended following India’s Agnipath scheme. These facts support the point that Gurkhas/Gorkhas/Gorkhalis, whether Indian or Nepali nationals today, are fundamentally of Nepalese origin.
5. Outside India, Gurkha soldiers of the British Indian Army were deployed during World War II in places such as Myanmar (Burma) and Malaysia. After the war, many settled there permanently, giving rise to communities now known as Burmese Gurkhas/Nepali-speaking/origin Burmese citizens and Nepali-origin communities in Malaysia.
6. To summarize: whether they serve in India, Myanmar, the United Kingdom, Singapore, Brunei, or Malaysia, Gurkhas trace their historical roots to Nepal. The terms Gorkha/Gorkhali/Gurkha themselves originate from central Nepal, and the soldiers historically came from Nepal before later diasporic settlement in neighboring regions. Some descendants in India today identify as Indian Gorkhas, but that does not change their historical Nepalese origin. Therefore, describing Gurkhas as “Nepalese-origin soldiers” is historically accurate. Furthermore, the British Brigade of Gurkhas, Singapore Gurkha Contingent, and Brunei Gurkha Reserve Unit recruit only Nepali citizens, while the Indian Gorkha regiments recruits both Nepali citizens from Nepal and Nepali-speaking Indian citizens of Nepalese origin.
7. The section titled “The Gurkha soldiers are recruited into the following armed forces:” should not be removed, because it clearly explains the military organizations in which Gurkhas serve.
8. Likewise, the paragraph explaining recruitment backgrounds should remain intact, as it provides important contextual information:

First line

“Notably, the Brigade of Gurkhas (United Kingdom), the Gurkha Contingent (Singapore), and the Gurkha Reserve Unit (Brunei) recruit only Nepali citizens, whereas the Gorkha Regiments (India) recruit both Nepali citizens from Nepal, and Nepali-speaking Indian citizens from India."

Second line

"Ordinary citizens of these two demographic groups: Nepali citizens from Nepal, and Nepali-speaking Indian citizens from India, becomes Gurkhas by applying for the sections and successfully completing the recruitment and training process."

There is no valid reason to delete this paragraph either, as it explains the recruitment background of Gurkha soldiers in a factual and neutral manner. Northpixel (talk) 07:55, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, that was the one thing still missing - you outsourcing the discussion to AI slop. I'm rapidly losing hope for any constructive outcome here. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 11:07, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

alright, no more AI "slop" form now on, even though I only used it to make my comment more clearer. Now come back to the actual topic. Read my whole talk section and explain what's wrong with it and why you reverted it. Northpixel (talk) 11:17, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Alright, let’s take this step by step (2)

My previous section was close because I used ai to clarify my comment. Reply here after reading that section. I'm free to teach you today about my histroy. Northpixel (talk) 11:08, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

No one is going to read that AI crap. Argue in your own terms, or not at all. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 11:42, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

(Personal attack removed) Northpixel (talk) 13:54, 18 May 2026 (UTC)