Talk:Nepal

The economy part is nonsense

give me permit to edit it out. Juddhasumsher (talk) 03:31, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

@Juddhasumsher: We can't do that if you don't explain why. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:46, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

the part of slave workers is harsh and inhumane to the people of Nepal. It doesn't explain the economy of the nation and you are writing your imagination. Juddhasumsher (talk) 03:50, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

I deleted the entire section because it was non-neutral and conflated Nepali emigrants with immigrants. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:35, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

@Juddhasumsher: By the way, don't accuse Wikipedia editors of being racist because you accuse some statement in the article of being false; see WP:Civil for further explanation. We do not censor content because it is "harsh and inhumane" to a country or ethnic group. It would be on-topic and probably due weight to include information about labor rights violations in a country article. The only reason I did remove the section is because it used non-neutral language, and it conflated sources about Nepali emigrants working in other countries with sources about immigrants working in Nepal. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:42, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

Why are we making such claims like child labour in employment section? The post and photo says "citation needed" where is the citations for child labour. This page has to be propaganda against Nepal. Completely disspointed in Wikipedia editors. Editors shouldn't be writing their imagination and labelled photo with "citation needed" and no proper evidence. Please think and thank you. Juddhasumsher (talk) 04:08, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

don't use a wide net to catch one fish! not all of us are bad. One Reaction was here. Got a complaint? 12:11, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 March 2026

This is regarding section "2025 protests and government crisis"

The fourth paragraph in this section mentions "....fled the country". This is factually wrong and needs immediate correction.

References for the fact that the statement is incorrect and the then prime minister after resignation stayed in protection with the Nepalese Army in Kathmandu Valley.

1. https://www.tbsnews.net/world/south-asia/nepals-ousted-pm-oli-makes-first-public-appearance-says-he-wont-flee-1248146 2.https://www.jagonews24.com/en/international/news/85500 3. https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/nepals-ousted-prime-minister-kp-sharma-oli-exits-army-barracks-relocates-after-gen-z-protests-2789756-2025-09-19 4. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/kp-sharma-oli-leaves-nepal-armys-barracks-moves-to-private-house/articleshow/123980175.cms

Thank you Prajwalghimire (talk) 15:14, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

•  Done Thank you for pointing out a BLP violation. ―Maltazarian ^{(talk$\lor$investigate)} 18:09, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Nepal will use Indian English

Nepal will use Indian English due to proximity to India. ~2026-15180-73 (talk) 08:43, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

no. One Reaction was here. Got a complaint? 12:16, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

There should be another section listing Madeshi non-dalit and Madeshi dalit groups

There should be another section listing Madeshi non-dalit and Madeshi dalit groups you guys have added Madeshi only and written ( mentioned ) Madeshi non dalit population only and written dalits group also inside Madeshi non dalit like chamar is Madeshi dalit fix it .. ~2026-17530-49 (talk) 05:25, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 March 2026

The Energy section under Infrastructure is generally out of date. More specifically, Nepal's current installed electricity capacity is 3,878 megawatts (MW) as of summer of 2025 as opposed to the stated 1,100 MW. In addition to this, export of power to Bangladesh and India should be added.
References:
https://www.sasec.asia/index.php?page=news&nid=1655&url=installed-electricity-capacity-nepal-3878
https://theannapurnaexpress.com/story/54111/
https://www.isas.nus.edu.sg/papers/nepals-impressive-progress-in-the-hydroelectricity-sector/
https://www.sasec.asia/index.php?page=news&nid=1647&url=nep-starts-export-ban-via-ind
https://kathmandupost.com/national/2025/06/15/nepal-resumes-electricity-export-to-bangladesh
https://thehimalayantimes.com/business/nepal-to-export-additional-20-mw-electricity-to-bangladesh
https://www.sasec.asia/index.php?page=news&nid=1659&url=nepal-adds-elec-export-2025
https://risingnepaldaily.com/news/66454
https://www.easternmirrornagaland.com/nepal-earns-inr-937-billion-from-electricity-export-to-india-and-bangladesh Encyclopedia1742 (talk) 23:21, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

None of the cited articles mentions "millions of Nepalis in india".

I read through all the cited articles. None of them has even one line on the number of Nepali immigrants in india. All research papers from Google Scholar, about the topic seem to indicate less than 1 million Nepali citizens in india thereby totally contradicting the assertion of "millions" of Nepali citizens in india. Further the fake assertion that there are millions of Nepali citizens in india seem to be opposite to the lived-reality wherein Nepal has witnessed frequent and multiple protests by indian immigrants in Nepal demanding changes to Nepal's citizenship laws, whereas there have been no such news about Nepali citizens in india demanding changes to india's citizenship laws.

I am not a judge so I'm not going decide which sides claim are more credible, but I do believe given the lack of data on the matter, lived-reality should be given precedence and so I suggest removing the fake statement from Nepal related pages till this information is verified. ~2026-20822-53 (talk) 16:35, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Lived experience is original research and is not given priority over reliable sources. Regardless, the two citations given do not mention India as a main destination of Nepalis, nor "millions" of migrant workers, so I modified the sentence accordingly. Yue🌙 (talk) 07:40, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

indian propoganda against Nepal all over the "society" section.

I did a Google search for Gadhimai festival, anyone can. It's amazing to see the article completely omit the fact that the so-called 'Gadhimai temple' lies on india-Nepal border and that 90% of the attendees to the festival are indians, all of whom almost exclusively come from indian state of Bihar. Don't really see why this section was provided in "society" section under Nepal instead of india.

Further it seems 100% of the animals brought in for the sacrifice seem to have been brought from India as well, as a simple Google search showed multiple articles about bihar police trying to ban movement of trucks carrying all the animals to be sacrificed from Bihar to Nepal.

The cited material for "forcing women to eat excrement" also reveals that the incident happened at india-Nepal border and that the perpetrators were all indians not Nepalese.

The deliberate omission of the words india, indians or indian immigrants from the "society" section, even though all of the cited materials clearly mention some linkages to india or indians, shows it was not a mistake but a deliberate and mischievous act to malign the image of people of Nepal. Deliberate omission of the word india or indians from the section, about a festival which is 90% exclusively attended by bihari indian people at india-Nepal border, cannot be anything, but a propoganda piece against Nepal. ~2026-20822-53 (talk) 23:13, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

That doesn't matter. The temple is geographically in Nepal, and we don't need excessive detail. We have an article on the Gadhimai festival for this. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:18, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

oh ok, so propoganda against people of Nepal doesn't matter. Got it. ~2026-20822-53 (talk) 23:22, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

While the inclusion of this content in the main article for Nepal is debatable, everything you've argued here is original research. I checked the citation for the excrement sentence because it's the easiest claim of yours to verify, and the detail is not in the source at all, so it makes your other claims equally as doubtful. Can you provide reliable sources that verify your claims? Yue🌙 (talk) 07:35, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 April 2026

Change the Chief Justice to Sapana Pradhan Malla. LevisAquae (talk) 14:58, 6 April 2026 (UTC)

Already done it appears. Happy editing, Slomo666 (talk) 19:35, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 April 2026

Change official country title from "Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal" to "Nepal".

The United Nations UNTERM database gives the country as "Nepal" with a note that it was changed from "Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal" to "Nepal" on 14 Dec 2020 (see https://unterm.un.org/unterm2/en/view/3922e336-a0f8-4780-b597-d9485555160e).

The ISO Country Codes database last changed the full name shortly after that, on 01 Jan 2021, and it currently shows as blank (i.e. the same as the short name, "Nepal") (see https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:code:3166:NP).

The United Kingdom's country names list published by the PCGN changed "Democratic Federal Republic of Nepal" [sic] to "Nepal" on 22 Jan 2021 (see https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/country-names#full-publication-update-history).

The United Kingdom's country names list published by the FCDO changed "The Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal" to "Nepal" on 17 Feb 2022 (see https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/geographical-names-and-information#full-publication-update-history).

Other country names lists published by the United States and European Union likewise specify just "Nepal". In fact, I can't find any reputable source still listing the long-form name as "Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal". Fosser26 (talk) 18:25, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Not done for now: For edit requests that might be controversial, please establish a consensus for the alteration before posting the edit request. It seems like Nepal's parliamentary committee rejected the change in late 2020 from "Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal" to "Nepal" (), and it's not clear to me what the final outcome was. Cadddr (talk) 20:18, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Even after reading the page on consensus I am still unsure what process I should have followed to establish consensus before suggesting the change. In any case, in my defence, I was unaware of the news articles you have cited so the change did not strike me as being at all controversial and therefore being in need of establishing any prior consensus (and the consensus page does say "An edit has presumed consensus until it is disputed"...): All the major country name authorities am I aware of (at least in the English-speaking world) are in complete agreement that the country title is simply "Nepal".

Having read the news stories, I am unsure of the final outcome regarding the news that the government was directed not to implement the change. They are all dated 9 November 2020, whereas all the country name authorities I cited that have change logs referring to the change mention later dates than that (14 December 2020 for UNTERM, 1 January 2021 for ISO, 22 January 2021 for PCGN and 17 February 2022 for FCDO) so perhaps the government ignored the directive of November 2020 to not go ahead with the name change, or else the committee changed its mind?

The argument for making the change to Wikipedia seems to me to be much stronger than the argument for leaving it as-is. Granted, the news stories do throw some confusion into the matter, but I imagine the experts at the United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names (UNGEGN) (whose list of country names is in harmony with the UNTERM list), the United States Board on Geographic Names (BGN) and the United Kingdom Permanent Committee on Geographical Names (PCGN) all considered any relevant evidence themselves before reaching their (consensus) decision to change their lists to just "Nepal".

Given the choice between what all those (and other) country name authorities say and the different title that Wikipedia currently has it seems like a no-brainer to belatedly update Wikipedia as those authorities did around five years ago (unless anyone knows of other country name authorities saying otherwise, beyond these news stories). This strategy would seem to fit the instruction "Be bold, but not reckless, in updating articles" given at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Five_pillars.

I will also note that the current page gives no citation for the claim in its opening sentence or in the country information side-panel at the top of the page that the name is officially the longer text. The only other mention of the full name is at the top of the section titled Politics, which claims the name comes from the country's constitution, for which reference 129 links to https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Nepal_2015. That appears to be the current constitution, adopted in 2015, but it does not contain any definitive statement itself as to what the country's official title is. The only mention of the phrase "Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal" appears in passing in Article 56 (1), the purpose of which appears to be to define the structure of the state, not the title of the state. Constitutions that unambiguously define a state's title traditionally do so very early on, often in Article 1, but this constitution repeatedly says just "Nepal" throughout the Preamble, all 9 Articles of PART 1 and onwards. Using the single mention in passing in Article 56 (1) as the citation for the claim that "Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal" is the official title strikes me as a very weak argument.

I would therefore politely request that the matter be given further consideration (or else that clear instructions are passed along to me if there are some actions I am supposed to take to establish consensus first). I believe there is a strong case for making the change, and only a weak case for the title being given as it currently is to start with. In the light of the news stories it would certainly be reasonable to mention that there is some possible confusion and give the links you have found as citations, and maybe even re-use the constitution reference as a further point of confusion. Fosser26 (talk) 20:24, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello, and no worries, it's not a big deal! It's totally understandable that you thought it would be uncontroversial. The action you need to take in order to try to establish consensus is to open a new discussion section below (you can click here to do that) and explain why you think the change should be made. Then wait for others to comment. It's pretty much the same as what you already did in this section, except without the "Extended-confirmed-protected edit request" title and template.

The reason is just that edit requests are automatically added to a list that some editors like me work through. Keeping edit requests that could be controversial on the list would make the list unmanageably long. So instead, when there's something that might be controversial, we mark it as "not done for now" and ask for you to start a discussion about it first. Once you achieve consensus, you can open a new edit request.

You're right that [a]n edit has presumed consensus until it is disputed. If this page were like most pages on Wikipedia, I would encourage you to boldly make the edit yourself, and then if nobody disputed it, the edit would have presumed consensus. If someone did object to it, they'd probably revert it, and then you would start a discussion on the talk page to try to achieve consensus. That's known as the bold-revert-discuss cycle. The difference here is that this page is extended confirmed protected, which means only extended-confirmed editors can make edits. So unfortunately, only extended-confirmed editors are able to be bold on this page. Because you're not yet extended-confirmed, you instead need achieve consensus through discussion from the beginning.

I hope that makes more sense. Feel free to ask me (either here or on my talk page) if you have any more questions. Cadddr (talk) 03:23, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Change official country title from "Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal" to "Nepal"

I would like to propose that the official country title be changed from "Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal" to "Nepal".

The United Nations UNTERM database gives the country as "Nepal" with a note that it was changed from "Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal" to "Nepal" on 14 December 2020 (see https://unterm.un.org/unterm2/en/view/3922e336-a0f8-4780-b597-d9485555160e).

The ISO Country Codes database last changed the full name shortly after that, on 1 January 2021, and it currently shows as blank (i.e. the same as the short name, "Nepal") (see https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:code:3166:NP).

The United Kingdom's country names list published by the PCGN changed "Democratic Federal Republic of Nepal" [sic] to "Nepal" on 22 January 2021 (see https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/country-names#full-publication-update-history).

The United Kingdom's country names list published by the FCDO changed "The Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal" to "Nepal" on 17 February 2022 (see https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/geographical-names-and-information#full-publication-update-history).

Other country names lists published by the United States and European Union likewise specify just "Nepal". In fact, I can't find any reputable source still listing the long-form name as "Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal".

The point has been raised that it seems like Nepal's parliamentary committee rejected the change in late 2020 from "Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal" to "Nepal" and it's not clear what the final outcome was (see https://www.southasiamonitor.org/nepal/it-federal-democratic-republic-nepal-not-just-nepal-parliamentary-committee-says, https://myrepublica.nagariknetwork.com/index.php/news/house-panel-directs-govt-not-to-implement-decision-to-use-nepal-as-country-s-official-name and https://kathmandupost.com/national/2020/11/09/it-is-federal-democratic-republic-nepal-not-just-nepal-parliamentary-committee-says).

However, those three news stories are all dated 9 November 2020, whereas all the country name authorities cited above that have change logs referring to the change mention later dates than that (14 December 2020 for UNTERM, 1 January 2021 for ISO, 22 January 2021 for PCGN and 17 February 2022 for FCDO) so perhaps the government ignored the directive of November 2020 to not go ahead with the name change, or else the committee changed its mind?

The argument for making the change to Wikipedia seems to me to be much stronger than the argument for leaving it as-is. Granted, the news stories do throw some confusion into the matter, but I imagine the experts at the United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names (UNGEGN) (whose list of country names is in harmony with the UNTERM list), the United States Board on Geographic Names (BGN) and the United Kingdom Permanent Committee on Geographical Names (PCGN) all considered any relevant evidence themselves before reaching their decisions to change their lists to just "Nepal".

Unless anyone knows of other country name authorities saying otherwise (i.e. some reputable source beyond the news stories cited above) then it seems like a no-brainer to belatedly update Wikipedia as UNTERM, ISO and the others I cited above did around five years ago.

I will also note that the current page gives no citation for the claim in its opening sentence or in the country information side-panel at the top of the page that the name is officially the longer text. The only other mention of the full name is at the top of the section titled Politics, which claims the name comes from the country's constitution, for which reference 129 links to https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Nepal_2015. That appears to be the current constitution, adopted in 2015, but it does not contain any definitive statement itself as to what the country's official title is. The only mention of the phrase "Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal" appears in passing in Article 56 (1), the purpose of which appears to be to define the structure of the state, not the title of the state. Constitutions that unambiguously define a state's title traditionally do so very early on, often in Article 1, but this constitution repeatedly says just "Nepal" throughout the Preamble, all 9 Articles of PART 1 and onwards. Using the single mention in passing in Article 56 (1) as the citation for the claim that "Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal" is the official title strikes me as a very weak argument.

I would therefore politely request that this matter be given due consideration. I believe there is a strong case for making the change, and only a weak case for the title being given as it currently is to start with. In the light of the news stories it would certainly be reasonable to mention that there is some possible confusion and give the news stories links as citations, and maybe even re-use the constitution reference as a further possible point of confusion instead of the manner in which it is currently being used. Fosser26 (talk) 09:46, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

I am not sure about the BGN and PCGN, but UNGEGN still names the country as "the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal" on its website . Either way, it is possible the issue merits greater coverage in the Politics section. CMD (talk) 12:13, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

That's surprising. Perhaps that interface is out of date. The reason I say this is that UNGEGN has a list of country names available from here: https://unstats.un.org/unsd/ungegn/working_groups/wg1.cshtml. The link to "E/CONF.105/13" is a PDF file from August 2017, which is apparently the latest approved list, and that file also contains the name "Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal (the)". However, the same wg1.cshtml page also notes that unofficial working versions are produced at each session of the working group. The latest session was 2025, the documents from which are available here: https://unstats.un.org/unsd/ungegn/sessions/4th_session_2025/#documents. In Agenda item 5(e) you will find a link to the latest working version of that document, called "GEGN.2/2025/171/CRP.171", in which you will see that the formal name has been updated to just "Nepal". Fosser26 (talk) 12:30, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

I have to say I think the interface at https://ungegn.un.org/ is indeed running on out-of-date data. There are numerous other errors on that site, e.g. Eritrea (https://ungegn.un.org/dashboard/countries/details?id=232) gives the Formal Name "Eritrea" instead of "State of Eritrea"; Fiji (https://ungegn.un.org/dashboard/countries/details?id=242) gives the Formal Name "Republic of the Fiji Islands" instead of "Republic of Fiji"; Iceland (https://ungegn.un.org/dashboard/countries/details?id=352) gives the Formal Name "Republic of Iceland" instead of "Iceland"; and Turkey (https://ungegn.un.org/dashboard/countries/details?id=792) gives the Formal Name "Republic of Turkey" instead of "Republic of Türkiye".

At least the last two are changes in fairly recent years which it appears that website simply hasn't caught up with yet. The latest (2025) working version of the PDF report that I cited gets all of those Formal Names correct, as do other sources such ISO, PCGN and BGN/NGS/GENC, so I would disregard the Formal Name given for Nepal on that site as being potentially out-of-date data. Fosser26 (talk) 12:45, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

An update to this: UNGEGN Secretariat have replied to an email query I sent them regarding the state of the data at https://ungegn.un.org/. They informed me that, "The World Geographical Names Database is in a betastate, both in terms of the underlying data and the system itself." This no doubt explains the discrepancies noted above between the data on that website and the more up-to-date PDF report that I cited earlier. Fosser26 (talk) 21:02, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

For the BGN, their page on foreign names (https://www.usgs.gov/us-board-on-geographic-names/foreign-names) refers to the GNS, which has a table of country codes available as a .CSV file from the "GNS Code Reference Tables" section at https://geonames.nga.mil/geonames/GNSHome/reference.html. That file gives the full name as Nepal. The same page also notes that codes come from the GENC standard, which is online here: https://nsgreg.nga.mil/registries/browse/results.jsp?registryType=genc and also contains the full name "Nepal" (see https://nsgreg.nga.mil/genc/view?i=1120963&month=4&day=13&year=2026).

The PCGN list is here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/country-names/country-names-the-permanent-committee-on-geographical-names-for-british-official-use and likewise gives the full name "Nepal" Fosser26 (talk) 12:39, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

The Constitution of Nepal has not been changed since 2016. The official name of the country is still the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal. See page 45: "Structure of State: (1) The main structure of the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal shall be of three levels, namely the Federation, the State and the Local level." Yue🌙 (talk) 17:31, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

I quoted article of the constitution in my original post:

"The only mention of the phrase "Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal" appears in passing in Article 56 (1), the purpose of which appears to be to define the structure of the state, not the title of the state. Constitutions that unambiguously define a state's title traditionally do so very early on, often in Article 1, but this constitution repeatedly says just "Nepal" throughout the Preamble, all 9 Articles of PART 1 and onwards. Using the single mention in passing in Article 56 (1) as the citation for the claim that "Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal" is the official title strikes me as a very weak argument." Fosser26 (talk) 18:59, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Regarding madeshi section

There should be a separate section clearly listing Madheshi non-Dalit and Madheshi Dalit groups. Currently, everything is grouped under “Madheshi,” but only the non-Dalit population is mentioned properly. Dalit groups have been incorrectly included within the Madheshi non-Dalit category for example, Chamar is a Madheshi Dalit community. This needs to be corrected for accuracy and proper classification. Madeshi brahmin (talk) 06:50, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 May 2026

Change parliament house building photo to new building. Ppraxtro (talk) 05:19, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please detail the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. What new building? Give me the file that shows the image of the new building, then I'll do it. Hamimh2 (talk) 21:21, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Set an expiry date so that editors can make changes directly instead of limiting edits to only a number of users

Set an expiry date for editing this page.

Add Spiny babbler is a bird species found only in Nepal. ~2026-35050-66 (talk) 04:12, 16 June 2026 (UTC)